By cleverly framing this debate around the bumper-sticker term "net neutrality," those who want to regulate broadband like dialup, created a very helpful myth to bolster their pro-Internet regulation cause.
By insinuating that the net was neutral, it made the proposed regulation sound less onerous and threatening, and more virtuous. Too bad it wasn't true. The Internet is not a "neutral," equal, one tier network.
If people knew the facts and not the spin, I believe they would be much less inclined to support the net neutrality concept. That's why I have begun a series of one-pagers that debunk these big myths promoted by the neutr-elitists.
No net neutrality myth is bigger than "the net is neutral today."
This link http://www.netcompetition.org/docs/Debunking-the-Myths-Part-1.pdf links to my first one-pager of the "Debunking the Myths" series that can be found on the Netcompetition.org site.
In a nutshell, the one pager provides a detailed rebuttal of the assertion "the net is neutral."
First, Internet traffic is not treated neutrally; large entities that invest more in infrastrucutre and pay more -- get better Internet service.
Second, the Internet backbone is not equal, but tiered into three peering tiers.
Third, Internet acess pricing differentiation is the norm, with dialup, free services and various speeds of broadband for a variety of prices and terms.
Fourth, Net usage is far from equal; ~5% of users consume ~50% of the bandwidth.
Finally, Net legal precedent is not neutral or equal but extremely different between telecom, cable and wireless technologies.
