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

Poll: Is it censorship when a private retailer decides not to sell a particular video game?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenNo problem. It's rarely an issue so it's not brought up much.05/30/2015 - 3:12pm
DocMelonheadsorry about that, it's just that it seems that IP wanted to make sure everyone knows that Gamergate were nothing but insecure harassers.05/30/2015 - 3:05pm
Andrew EisenFor instance, if everyone finds your comments annoying, try saying the same thing but in a different way. Who knows? Maybe a slight tweak in your approach to communicating will be all it takes to foster awesome and interesting discussions.05/30/2015 - 2:58pm
Andrew EisenDoc - I had to slightly edit a few of your comments. Please keep the heavier profanities out of the Shout box. And everyone, discussions are fine and dandy but do endeavor to keep things pleasant, okay?05/30/2015 - 2:51pm
DocMelonheadWhich is why I find him/her to be annoying as hell.05/30/2015 - 12:34pm
ConsterIP raises valid points sometimes, but they're drowned out by his "REPENT, SINNER!" attitude.05/30/2015 - 12:32pm
DocMelonheadOne of them were friend of those who got harassed by GameGate; another feel that GamerGate made it worst for people like her.05/30/2015 - 12:19pm
DocMelonheadI met several people at Boing Boing who have their own personal grude against them;05/30/2015 - 12:16pm
DocMelonheadSo, the question is this Iron Patriot, WHAT'S YOUR BEEF AGAINST GAMERGATE?05/30/2015 - 12:15pm
DocMelonheadThat's why many Anti-GG here see you as a JERK.05/30/2015 - 12:09pm
DocMelonheadSo in other words, You failed to keep a decent disscusion and proceed to talk down on those who argues against you.05/30/2015 - 12:08pm
DocMelonheadBut that's the thing, all you said that GamerGate is NOTHING BUT HARASSMENT AND VICTIM BLAMING05/30/2015 - 12:07pm
DocMelonheadAlso, IP you're no better than GamerGate; and yes, it ENABLE death threats, but not encourage them.05/30/2015 - 12:06pm
DocMelonheadSo who agree that the report buttion should be put back up.05/30/2015 - 12:05pm
DocMelonheadalso We all agree that you're annoy as heck IP05/30/2015 - 12:05pm
DocMelonheadGoth Skunk never gone victim blaming05/30/2015 - 12:04pm
DocMelonheadHarassment=Bullying.05/30/2015 - 12:01pm
IronPatriotBecause gamergate death threats, rape threats and doxxing are SO SIMILAR to pointing out the facts and logical failings of gamergate.05/30/2015 - 11:29am
IronPatriotLet's see. Gamergate sends death and rape threats against innocent women, and goth skunk blames the victims for getting harrassed. I point out gamergate harrassment and victim-blaming, and the pro-gamergaters squeal that they have been harassed? LOL!05/30/2015 - 11:28am
WonderkarpAs a life long X-Men fan, I cant tell you how much this annoys me http://www.ign.com/articles/2015/05/30/between-the-panels-marvels-merchandising-problem05/30/2015 - 10:23am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician