Nearly every mainstay liberal publication is out in full force today clamoring about the potential loss of Obama Era “Net Neutrality”, and more than 80,00 major websites across the internet are “protesting” the FCC’s measure to reverse “Net Neutrality.” Websites such as Facebook, Amazon, Google, and Netflix are all engaged in digital protests, with banners and warnings about the potential reversal. Even Pocahontas has come out of her tipi to proclaim the dangers of rolling back “Net Neutrality”:

We need a free & open internet – not one that tilts the playing field for the rich & powerful who already made it. We need #netneutrality — Elizabeth Warren (@SenWarren) July 12, 2017

There is only one problem – Title II regulations ARE NOT “NET NEUTRALITY”.

What is Net Neutrality?

TRENDING: Black Lives Matter Activist Wearing 'Justice for Breonna Taylor' Shirt Walked into a Louisville Bar and Murdered Three People

All internet connected computers have a unique address so that they can communicate with each other. The communications/transmissions are set between computers and servers in what is called “packets”; when you visit Facebook.com, for example, your computer is downloading multiple packets that are then displayed as what ever images/posts/text/video Facebook transmits to you. Net Neutrality is a regulatory effort over how that traffic gets to you; so under Net Neutrality, your aunt’s family newsletter website is given the same priority as Amazon.com. Or even, The Gateway Pundit is given the same priority in transmission as the New York Times. Sounds pretty good so far, right? Well, let’s get into what Title II actually is/does…

What is Title II?

Title II is completely different than Net Neutrally, and is currently being conflated as such by the left. Currently, they are claiming that Title II IS guaranteeing Net Neutrality, and that if it is rolled back there are no protections or guarantees that Americans will be able to access the same set of information or web sites. What Title II actually is, is a convoluted set of rules that were originally applied in the 1930s as part of the Communications Act. Part of Title II, which again was originally developed when we had rotary phones, is that ISPs are subject to universal service requirements: people in rural areas are required to be provided access at the cost of the service provider, in the same sense that phone companies are required to wire all houses in America regardless of how far or inaccessible.

Summery of the biggest problems:

Title II will very easily send already high internet prices skyrocketing with decreased levels of service. In addition to giving the FCC the power to demand that ISPs wire every house in America, Title II also gives the FCC the ability to set costs for internet usage removing potential marketplace competition and then sets ISP lobbyists up to campaign for higher internet costs. In increases the Federal Government’s ability to spy on U.S. citizens. As originally leaked by Edward Snowden, the Fed has been working on building a global infrastructure, capable of spying on any citizen and accessing their personal information, since the Bush administration. Title II regulation give the Fed infinitely more control to pressure the corporation of ISPs in allowing them access to whatever they want. A parallel situation has already played out in the case of now-defunct secure email service Lavabit. The threat to Internet freedom is NOT ISPs, it is the Federal Government. AT&T and other major US carriers have frequently said they support actual net neutrality, and they rightly should. If ISPs started regulating what information could go to whom, and they prioritized their content over that of a competitor, then there would be MASS rebellion against them. To give a division of the Fed such a broad scope of power and cost regulation over ISPs would dramatically hurt building a more robust broadband US infrastructure while simultaneously further hampering marketplace competition.

Woke Twitter knows all this:

#NetNeutrality seems like a scam, on par with the fairness doctrine. Getting a lot of establishment push. I don't trust it. — Red Pill Philosophy (@RedPillTweets) July 12, 2017

https://twitter.com/_Makada_/status/885189716571803649

If you want to read more on the misinformation about Net Neutrality being spread by the left, check out this EXCELLENT OpEd by Geoffrey Manne in Wired.