The Planes, Trains and MA Bell Argument

August 16, 2010 -

An editorial in the Wall Street Journal called "The Railroad Precedent and the Web " takes the "doom and gloomers" who cried foul last week concerning Google and Verizon's recommendations to the FCC and lawmakers to task.

The editorial is penned by none other than L. Gordon Crovitz, the former publisher of The Wall Street Journal (saw the growth of the Wall Street Journal Online, according to his bio), executive vice president of Dow Jones and president of its Consumer Media Group. He is decidedly anti-net neutrality and anti-regulation.

In his opinion piece, Crovitz opens with the reactions to last week's Google-Verizon announcement:

"The pact to end the Internet as we know it," said a report on the Huffington Post. Wired's headline called Google a "net neutrality surrender monkey." The lobbying group Free Press called it "fake net neutrality." MoveOn.org called Google "just another giant corporation out to make a buck regardless of the consequences" and organized protests at the company's Silicon Valley headquarters.

The second paragraph is even more delightful, calling out games as one of those bandwidth hogging activities:

The cause of the hysteria was a statement issued last week by Google and Verizon focusing on the need for more competition instead of more regulation to support the "open Internet"—a more apt term than the loaded "net neutrality." The companies said that highly competitive wireless services, such as smart phones, should be largely unregulated. Bandwidth-hogging games and services could require added payments to Internet service providers.

Crovitz says that, because of what Google is now saying, the net neutrality arguments have run their course. He mentions the railroads and what over-regulation did to them. He closes by summoning the ghosts of 1970's airline deregulation and the FCC's handling of MA Bell to drive the point home:

The words of Alfred Kahn, who led deregulation of airlines under President Carter, should be required reading for anyone tempted by net neutrality. "When a commission is responsible for the performance of an industry," he famously wrote in "The Economics of Regulation" (1970), "it is under never completely escapable pressure to protect the health of the companies it regulates, to assure a desirable performance by relying on those monopolistic chosen instruments and its own controls, rather than on the unplanned and unplannable forces of competition."

This explains why an earlier generation of FCC regulators saw their role as protecting Ma Bell and its monopoly, prolonging the days of rotary dials and high consumer costs. Today's FCC should focus on increasing competition, not increasing regulation, as the better way to ensure an open Internet.

[Commentary] The new argument on net neutrality should be the old one: that those with a vested interest in broadband and wireless are probably not the best people to set policy on it. Oil companies helped soften the regulatory policies we have now to some degree and you can look to the gulf coasts of Florida and Louisiana to see how that has worked out. It should also be noted that Mr. Crovitz would be singing a different tune if ISPs like the ones he so vehemently defends decided that certain newspaper publication weren't that important compared to other publications and should go to the back of the data line. Publications, like say, the Wall Street Journal Online.


Comments

Re: The Planes, Trains and MA Bell Argument

Considering I trust the WSJ about as far as I can throw Murdoch one handed.....

Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

Re: The Planes, Trains and MA Bell Argument

He's the guy from BEFORE the Murdoch takeover, but yeah, the WSJ's bias isn't exactly new to the Murdoch era.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will Target Australia sell the next GTA game upon its release?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenReally liking Child of Light so far (I play on console so UPlay isn't a concern). Gorgeous aesthetic with a fun presentation and battle system. So far, so good!07/30/2015 - 1:36pm
PHX CorpWell I'm offically on Windows 10 Laptop Wise(I had to download the Windows 10 Media tool from Microsoft to get it now rather than waiting for the update through windows update)07/30/2015 - 12:16pm
ZippyDSMleeI dunno I'd go to see it, seems liek dumb fun, better than half assed serious stuff that has so many holes large enough to drive mac trucks through(coughinterstellercouch).07/30/2015 - 10:58am
Andrew EisenGoth - Wait, you went to see Pixels just to spite Chipman?07/30/2015 - 10:49am
MechaCrashYou can see Pixels, which requires you to be a moron to enjoy it, or you can actually spend that time and money watching something actually good. Gosh, what a choice.07/30/2015 - 10:49am
benohawkHot damn, I'm sold. Why see something you can enjoy on multiple levels when you can nap through half the film and still get it all?07/30/2015 - 10:17am
james_fudgeSo what people are saying is PIXELS is a great movie to see if your are comatose.07/30/2015 - 9:47am
ZippyDSMleePixels is something to shut your brain off with and just try and enjoy. The rest of films not so much. LOL07/30/2015 - 8:49am
MechaTama31Child of Light looks interesting, but not "I'm willing to put Uplay on my PC" interesting.07/30/2015 - 7:51am
MattsworknameOn the subject of movies and video games, if you haven't seen it and your a street fighter fan, run down a copy fo Street fighter assassins fist. Its the best video game movie made, and its by a small studio07/30/2015 - 5:37am
Goth_SkunkSee, i didn't enjoy the Transformers films, but I don't really know why. I watched them for the sake of watching them, but I doubt I'd ever have a craving to watch them again. With Pixels, I would.07/30/2015 - 5:12am
Sora-ChanOn topics of movies in general: I usually find the argument of "shut down your brain and enjoy the movie" argument to be annoying. It was something that I was told to do when it came to the transformer movies from Bay, and it irked me when people said it.07/30/2015 - 5:03am
Goth_SkunkI did. And I didn't care much for it, but it was the reason I went and saw the film. The entire thing can be summed up in one sentence: "I didn't like it! If you pay to watch this movie, you're a big smelly poopy-head!"07/30/2015 - 4:56am
MattsworknameI think everyone here has Crono, we just don't agree with him or how he handles himself or his reviews, but thats us07/30/2015 - 4:55am
CronosonicThere are far worse problems Moviebob pointed out about Pixels than it not being 'serious'. Did you even /watch/ his review?07/30/2015 - 4:35am
MattsworknameAlso, newbusters verison. http://newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/tom-blumer/2015/07/29/venezuela-orders-food-producers-divert-output-empty-state-stores07/30/2015 - 4:25am
MattsworknameNot game related, but wow, Were are all those people who sand the praises of venezula now http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/L/LT_VENEZUELA_FOOD_SHORTAGES?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT07/30/2015 - 4:25am
Goth_Skunk... is one you can acknowledge, then you'll enjoy it.If you CAN'T acknowledge such a mindset, then you must be MovieBob. Welcome to GP. :^)07/30/2015 - 4:13am
Goth_SkunkIf you watch Pixels expecting it to be Film Of The Year, or if you expect a Best Actor performance from Adam Sandler, then yes, you will be disappointed. If the idea that a film can simply be fun and entertaining without needing to be serious...07/30/2015 - 4:12am
MattsworknameIm kinda torn goth, on one hand , the effects look cool, but im not sold on sandler as the star07/30/2015 - 3:54am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician