Poll: Over Half of Likely Voters Dislike Net Neutrality Rules

December 29, 2010 -

According to a new Rasmussen Reports survey 54 percent of the American public oppose the new net neutrality rules approved by the FCC last week. The national telephone survey also found that only 21 percent of likely U.S. voters want the FCC to regulate the Internet as it does radio and television, while 25 percent are not sure.

According to Rasmussen, the survey was conducted shortly after the FCC decided on a party line vote to impose net neutrality regulations on the Internet. Republicans and unaffiliated voters overwhelmingly opposed the FCC regulation of the Internet, while Democrats were more evenly divided. Those who use the Internet the most were most opposed to FCC regulations.

Fifty-six percent of voters believe that the FCC will use its regulatory powers to promote a political agenda. Half of that number (28 percent) disagreed.

The survey of 1,000 Likely Voters nationwide was conducted on December 23, 2010 by Rasmussen Reports. The margin of sampling error is +/- 3 percentage points with a 95 percent level of confidence. Fieldwork was conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC. S

Source: Rasmussen Reports


Comments

Re: Poll: Over Half of Likely Voters Dislike Net Neutrality ...

It all depends on how the question is asked, worded.  And how little the people actually know about the issue.  "Hey, do you want the government to interfere with internet business and freedoms, like a goddamned communist?  Or do you still believe in small government and liberty?  On that note, how do you feel about the FFC trying to push Net Neutrality rules down your throat?"

Re: Poll: Over Half of Likely Voters Dislike Net Neutrality ...

You've got that right. Frankly speaking, Americans aren't the brightest bulbs in the pack typically. If you tell them their "liberties" are being infringed they'll speak out against anything, regardless of whether it might actually be good for them or not.

Re: Poll: Over Half of Likely Voters Dislike Net Neutrality ...

That depends, Spiral. After all, if you look at some of the response to TSA's "enhanced" pat downs and such, I've actually seen people say "go ahead, bug my phone if it keeps me safe" from terrorists.

Which, of course, it wouldn't. But when it comes to that magical boogeyman that is terrorism, too many Americans are more than willing to give away any and all of their rights and liberties as long as they have the illusion of safety.

Re: Poll: Over Half of Likely Voters Dislike Net Neutrality ...

 I'd wager that the folks who are against Net Neutrality would be the first ones to bitch and moan when/if ISPs start charging them extra for access to sites, etc.  These guys are the least informed of the bunch when it comes to this issue.

Re: Poll: Over Half of Likely Voters Dislike Net Neutrality ...

I think you're right. The fact is, it's not surprising that most people are against net neutrality - after all, every ISP and phone company has been spamming 'net neutrality is the devil' commercials anywhere they can get airtime.

Re: Poll: Over Half of Likely Voters Dislike Net Neutrality ...

I find it amazing how willingly americans buy into the TV commercials (which at the end then state they were paid for by *INSERT LOBBY GROUP HERE*).

Not that Canada can really one-up that. During our last federal election, the Liberals ran commercials warning the people that the Conservatives would buy an aircraft carrier. Now, I don't know if you're familiar with Canada's GDP, but take my word for it, an aircraft carrier is out of our reach. Some idiots believed it though...

Oh wait, actually, we had a similar ad campaign here in Canada. We have three main wireless providers, who either own everything or host other services on their networks: Bell, Rogers, and Telus. When a foreign group expressed interest in buying into the wireless spectrum, the Big Three tried everything, but my favourite was a "DON'T LET CANADA BE OWNED BY FOREIGN INTERESTS" type campaign. Nevermind the fact that most "Canadian" businesses are already owned by Americans or have headquarters on certain tax free islands in the carribean...

Anyway, Americans, don't worry, we'll be getting our fight soon too. We've seen cable and satellite providers battling it out with broadcasters, and then "Canadian" wireless fighting with (what I believe are) Egyptian investors (who have caused cell phone prices across Canada to drop with their influx of competition... finally)... Net Neutrality is going to become the next big battle I imagine. Shame the CRTC has no balls, we're probably going to lose that fight.

Re: Poll: Over Half of Likely Voters Dislike Net Neutrality ...

Or more likely they would be the first to complain when they sign up for netflix streaming and discover horrible preformance.

Re: Poll: Over Half of Likely Voters Dislike Net Neutrality ...

They also might be thrilled to find that their service was disconnected for exceeding  their usage quota in as little of a week.

They cap monthly usage, limit high speeds to expensive tiers, and offer pathetically low upstream service because it makes it much, much harder to give your cable or satellite provider the boot. The majority of ISPs have other services they want you to buy and if the internet can to it better, they want to make certain that you can't utilize it. ISPs should not be able to modify service to their customers in any way that prevents them from using competing services, devices, or web sites. I pay for internet service, not world wide web service.

-Greevar

-Greevar

"Paste superficially profound, but utterly meaningless quotation here."

Re: Poll: Over Half of Likely Voters Dislike Net Neutrality ...

The phrase "Net Neutrality Regulation" is an oxymoron.

Re: Poll: Over Half of Likely Voters Dislike Net Neutrality ...

Of course, the White House will, as always, spin the fact that they're being criticized from both sides as evidence that this is a good compromise -- a logical fallacy that really, really needs to die.

As Dan Gillmor put it at Salon, "Sometimes, when everyone hates what you've done, you've done the wrong thing."

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Which group is more ethically challenged?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Andrew EisenThe original movie's Ecto-1 was a '59 Cadillac. I don't know cars but Twitter tells me this is an '84 Cadillac. The original Ghostbusters came out in '84. Cute!07/08/2015 - 1:14am
Andrew EisenHere's the back side: https://twitter.com/paulfeig/status/61862135787884953607/08/2015 - 1:07am
Andrew EisenNew Ecto-1! https://twitter.com/paulfeig/status/61860585924191846507/08/2015 - 12:58am
Goth_Skunk"The New Totalitarians Are Here" from The Federalist. http://ow.ly/Pjz3b07/07/2015 - 11:31pm
MattsworknameThere was a time in america when we needed unions and they served a good purpose, but that time hasnt been tbe case for about 20 years or more. The same could be said of our current system for teachers in higher educatoin,but thats a whole nother story07/07/2015 - 10:22pm
TechnogeekIn large part, though, that's an extension of the level of unjust deference given to police in general. Kind of hard to find any real grievances to defend against when the organizational culture views "complains about coworker" as worse than "murderer".07/07/2015 - 8:45pm
TechnogeekThat's a police union.07/07/2015 - 8:43pm
TechnogeekNo, police unions are worse by far. Imagine every negative stereotype about unions, then add "we can get away with anything".07/07/2015 - 8:43pm
Goth_SkunkeZeek: No, I do not agree they are union members.07/07/2015 - 7:48pm
E. Zachary KnightTeachers unions are just as bad as police unions, except of course you are far less likely to be killed by a teacher on duty than you are a cop. But they also protect bad teachers from being fired.07/07/2015 - 6:29pm
E. Zachary KnightGoth, so you agree they are still union members. Thankfully we have a first ammendment that protects people from being forced to join groups they don't support (in most cases any way.)07/07/2015 - 6:27pm
E. Zachary KnightAh, police unions. The reason why cops can't get fired when they beat a defenseless mentally ill homeless person to death. Or when they throw a grenade into a baby's crib. Or when theykill people they were called in to help not hurt themselves.07/07/2015 - 6:26pm
Goth_SkunkeZeek: Non-union employees have no right to attend meetings or union convention/AGM, or influence policy. The only time they get to vote is whether or not to strike.07/07/2015 - 6:24pm
Infophile(cont'd) about non-union police officers being given hell until they joined the union.07/07/2015 - 4:58pm
InfophileParadoxically, the drive in the US to get rid of unions seems to have left only the most corrupt surviving. They seem to be the only ones that can find ways to browbeat employees into joining when paying dues isn't mandatory. I've heard some stories ...07/07/2015 - 4:57pm
Matthew WilsonI am old school on this. I believe its a conflict of interest to have public sector unions. that being said, I do not have a positive look on unions in general.07/07/2015 - 3:59pm
TechnogeekWhat's best for the employee tends to be good for the employer; other way around, not so much. So long as that's the case, there's going to be a far stronger incentive for management to behave in such a way that invites retalitation than for the union to.07/07/2015 - 3:10pm
TechnogeekTeachers' unions? State legislatures. UAW? Just look at GM's middle management.07/07/2015 - 3:05pm
TechnogeekIn many ways it seems that the worse a union tends to behave, the worse that the company's management has behaved in the past.07/07/2015 - 3:02pm
james_fudgeCharity starts at home ;)07/07/2015 - 2:49pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician