FCC’s Regulation Changes Would Be A Step Backward

An article by Navarrow    View Comments

The Washington Post has always been one of the front runners of old media in race to ensure their content is available across multiple digital channels. I believe that the efforts they have made on the Washington Post.com and with the launch of the Root.com have set the standard for how other print outlets approach integrating the online channel into their business. They’ve also won a few Pulitzer’s, kept us informed  and made us understand the Beltway better.  With all that said, you have to believe Post’s owners and investors are deeply interested in being profitable and in making sure no ISP – or anyone else, for that matter – is manipulating access to their product.

So when the Washington Post calls the FCC’s attempt to regulate the Internet “a serious step backward,” you’ve got to take notice.      As the Post’s editorial says, the Internet is ”complex and evolving” and oversight must be flexible, and it must acknowledge that some rigid and detailed rules – like those first adopted generations ago – don’t make sense today.  “Establishing a clearly limited power to take action against anti-competitive violations, rather than encumbering this vital sector with detailed and prescriptive regulation, is the sensible approach.”

The article caught my eye because it’s saying what I’ve been saying for some time now. We are not talking about net nuetrality, we are talking about net “regulation” and if that regulation is made too broadly then innovation will suffer. We have to be clear with people about what’s really being debated and not cloud the issues with buzz words in attempts to incite emotions.  I agree with oversight but let’s not go down a path that will only slow progress and even more importantly adoption in the areas where it needs to happen the most.

Related articles by Zemanta

• Just say no to Ma Bell-era Net neutrality regulation (news.cnet.com)