Tweet
These week, Google and Verizon reached across the table to propose a joint framework to resolve the issues of network neutrality in a way that did not foster heavy-handed and unnecessary regulation of the Internet.
The reaction from opponents of "net neutrality" was one of cautious support. They did not like all of the points proposed, but appreciated the general framework and the courage of the two companies in seeking a solution.
The reaction from proponents was one of outrage and more empty rhetoric, led by organizations such as Free Press and MoveOn.org, joined by the Huffington Post.
In every war, there are those so invested in the war that they cannot tolerate the thought of peace. After the US Civil War, Confederate troops went to Mexico in the hopes of reviving the war. In World War Two, a young Japanese
soldier named Hiroo Onoda hid in the jungles of Lubang and continued to fight for another 29 years.
But the Prussian military thinker Carl von Clausewitz, widely regarded as one of the greatest military strategists, held that the purpose of war is to achieve a better state of peace. And frankly, the net neutrality "war" was proving to be unwieldy at best. Not only could proponents not decide on a coherent definition of the term, their assertion that the Internet needed more regulations to survive simply didn't match the reality of the marketplace.
With elections looming and the Obama administration mired in other, more serious issues, the framework proposed by these two industry icons is likely to be welcomed by thinkers on both sides of the table for what it is -- a step in the right direction, no matter what its minor flaws might be.
SOURCE: USIIA
The reaction from opponents of "net neutrality" was one of cautious support. They did not like all of the points proposed, but appreciated the general framework and the courage of the two companies in seeking a solution.
The reaction from proponents was one of outrage and more empty rhetoric, led by organizations such as Free Press and MoveOn.org, joined by the Huffington Post.
In every war, there are those so invested in the war that they cannot tolerate the thought of peace. After the US Civil War, Confederate troops went to Mexico in the hopes of reviving the war. In World War Two, a young Japanese
soldier named Hiroo Onoda hid in the jungles of Lubang and continued to fight for another 29 years.
But the Prussian military thinker Carl von Clausewitz, widely regarded as one of the greatest military strategists, held that the purpose of war is to achieve a better state of peace. And frankly, the net neutrality "war" was proving to be unwieldy at best. Not only could proponents not decide on a coherent definition of the term, their assertion that the Internet needed more regulations to survive simply didn't match the reality of the marketplace.
With elections looming and the Obama administration mired in other, more serious issues, the framework proposed by these two industry icons is likely to be welcomed by thinkers on both sides of the table for what it is -- a step in the right direction, no matter what its minor flaws might be.
SOURCE: USIIA