Well, everyone is certainly free to read the blog and the public comments to
it, then make up their own minds as to where the public sentiment lies. Once
again, a topic which elicits more comments than any other the FCC has ever
dealt with, in spite of people who feel obliged to claim otherwise.
And as this quote from the blog shows, I'm not the only one who has noticed how
this Chairman says one thing, with well-rehearsed rhetoric to put people to
sleep, and then means, and does, precisely the opposite. "Restoring Internet
freedom," his slogan for doing exactly the opposite, being just one example. He
wants to "restore" the freedom of three or four companies, to screw over
"Chairman Pai's own bio states that '[t]he FCC is at its best when it proceeds
on the basis of consensus; good communications policy knows no partisan
affiliation.' I agree. In practice though, this is not the approach the
Chairman has chosen to take on more than a dozen actions this year that
directly harm consumers and small businesses, including opening the door to
massive media consolidation, and weakening a program designed to provide
low-income Americans with affordable phone and broadband service. Nor is it the
path we are heading on when it comes to net neutrality."
Chairman Pai needs to appreciate that the public, thankfully, is not as
ignorant or as uninvolved as he thinks. People do care, and people aren't put
to sleep so easily, by oily, formulaic rhetoric. Best to tell it like it is,
and then pay close attention to what your bosses think.
Here's one a propos comment, from Drod PC-Geek:
"I'm not gonna let a corrupted chairman take our internet freedom away!"
That's it, in a nutshell. How exactly would a corrupted FCC behave any
differently? I'm not the only one wondering. There are more than 120 comments,
and just scanning them quickly, the *very* vast majority disagree with the
Chairman. Yet again.
There is a tiny number of ambivalent and confused, among the commenters. For
these, ask yourselves why, from 2000 to 2015, i.e. when broadband was allowed
to be non-neutral, extra competition among fixed broadband companies was just
as non-existent as it is now. It is ROI that keeps competitors away, not
neutrality regs. Using neutrality regs as the reason is just another form of
distraction, from this Chairman, so he can go ahead and do the bidding of those
three or four special interests. And ignore everyone else. He fools an
exceedingly small percentage of people with his cynical rhetoric. The
perennially and hopelessly clueless, or those on the take.
You can UNSUBSCRIBE from the OpenDTV list in two ways:
- Using the UNSUBSCRIBE command in your user configuration settings at
- By sending a message to: opendtv-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with the word
unsubscribe in the subject line.