The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    Michael Wolraich's picture

    What Would Teddy Do? Theodore Roosevelt on Net Neutrality

    By Michael Wolraich on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 9:59am | Politics

    “Above all else,” President Theodore Roosevelt admonished Congress in 1905, “we must strive to keep the highways of commerce open to all on equal terms.”

    Roosevelt could not have imagined digital computers and fiber-optic cables. He was talking about railroads, the highways of commerce in his day. But though the technology has changed, the principle TR expressed remains as essential as it was a century ago. We ignore it at our peril.

    Until now, our digital highways of commerce have been open to all on equal terms. Media conglomerates and big-box retailers transmit information through the same pipes as bloggers, startups and boutiques. This principle of equality, known as net neutrality, has stimulated competition and spurred innovation since the Internet began.

    But it might not last much longer.

    Read the full article at Reuters

    PS Thank you Michael Maiello for the Reuters connection

    Topics: 
    Politics

    Comments

    The only argument for different pricing that seems somewhat rational is that services like Netflix and Hulu that stream large content could impact servers because data volume that "regular" don't require. A higher price makes "sense". My gut says that once corporations can justify differential pricing, the consumer will be met with a host of increased pricing levels. I prefer the devil I know (our current situation) to more corporate control.


    by rmrd0000 on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 10:27am

    If the providers are worried about server load, they could add bandwidth limits and charge consumers for heavy use, but they won't do that for fear of losing customers. So instead, they charge content providers behind the scenes. Those costs will be passed on to consumers, of course, but more importantly, the fees favor big content providers that can negotiate with the cable companies, which will discourage competition from smaller providers.


    by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 11:15am

    Great column. Roosevelt on Net Neutrality.  Nobody else has made the connection and very few could.


    by Michael Maiello on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 10:46am

    Thank! Actually one dude did: http://www.franken.senate.gov/?p=news&id=711. See the end of the speech.


    by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 10:56am

    You should definitely be a senator.


    by Michael Maiello on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 11:10am

    I prefer to be the mastermind behind the throne. Al Franken is one of my sock puppets.


    by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 11:17am

    That's some timely history, sir. Well done.


    by Doctor Cleveland on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 12:19pm

    Thanks!


    by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 2:13pm

    There was a copywriter I knew who wrote a headline back in the late 90s: There's A New Railroad Across America...referring to the Internet, but drawing only the benign analogies of course.

    I don't know the intricacies, but one solution would've been to have treated the Internet like the airwaves as public property. After the government, if not Al Gore, did lay down the infrastructure for the Web, did it not?


    by Anonymous PS (not verified) on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 12:42pm

    The internet is public. What's not public is the "last mile" from the internet into your home.


    by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 2:12pm

    Ah, I didn't know that. Thanks. P


    by Anonymous PS (not verified) on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 8:03pm

    I am hooked up to Mediacom for my television and my internet connection.

    Basic cable is provided to everyone through their rent in this building. You cannot escape this 'hook-up'.

    I pay another forty bucks for internet that includes a telephone hook up.

    Now I woke up last week to discover that my basic cable hook up no longer includes CSPAN. I can opt in to some local plus tv thingy, but I will have to pay more for it.

    Now I can receive CSPAN on line anyway so who cares?

    Well, I have no choice as to cable service at this location. I mean if I went for something like DIRECT SATTELITE I would still be paying MEDIACOM per my rental contract!

    Oh and I lose CSPAN but I can now have two Fox Sports stations along with two ESPN stations! With the Big Ten network, I now have access to five sport stations. hahahah


    by Richard Day on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 12:46pm

    My only option is Time-Warner, which sucks, or DSL, which sucks. I live in the densest city in America yet only have one cable provider


    by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 2:18pm

    This will probably be where the change comes because consumers will demand more choices or for the communities to set up their own internet utility. Having a public option for services is going to grow as a populous movement.  


    by trkingmomoe on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 2:55pm

    It's hard for consumers to "demand" anything when there's nowhere else to go. TWC has a monopoly here. Some buildings have RCN. Not mine. And while I would like more choice, I'm not about to go occupy the Time-Warner center (which is no longer affiliated with Time-Warner cable in any case).


    by Michael Wolraich on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 3:43pm

    There is an organized push back from consumers and small providers.  I also know other countries are committed to net neutrality.  This ruling will cause a brain drain because innovation will leave the US.  Europe and South America is more then happy to fill that role.   


    by trkingmomoe on Mon, 05/05/2014 - 2:43pm