Commentary: Verizon-Google proposal doesn't require government involvement | McClatchy Washington Bureau

×
Sign In
Sign In
    • Customer Service
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Contact Us
    • Newsletters
    • Subscriber Services

    • All White House
    • Russia
    • All Congress
    • Budget
    • All Justice
    • Supreme Court
    • DOJ
    • Criminal Justice
    • All Elections
    • Campaigns
    • Midterms
    • The Influencer Series
    • All Policy
    • National Security
    • Guantanamo
    • Environment
    • Climate
    • Energy
    • Water Rights
    • Guns
    • Poverty
    • Health Care
    • Immigration
    • Trade
    • Civil Rights
    • Agriculture
    • Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • All Nation & World
    • National
    • Regional
    • The East
    • The West
    • The Midwest
    • The South
    • World
    • Diplomacy
    • Latin America
    • Investigations
  • Podcasts
    • All Opinion
    • Political Cartoons

  • Our Newsrooms

You have viewed all your free articles this month

Subscribe

Or subscribe with your Google account and let Google manage your subscription.

Opinion

Commentary: Verizon-Google proposal doesn't require government involvement

The Kansas City Star

August 11, 2010 02:29 PM

Google and Verizon deserve a couple of cheers for trying to go over the head of the Federal Communications Commission and make some headway in the tangled debate over the Internet's future.

But their proposal, envisioned as the starting point for congressional debate, fails to make the case for government intervention. Internet lines were deregulated in 2002. It's far from clear that the feds need to wade into what remains a thriving and competitive marketplace.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski says Internet service providers should be supervised under the same part of a Depression-era law that still governs the copper-wire phone companies. He says that wouldn't mean requirements for line-sharing or regulation of broadband rates, but it would require providers such as Verizon or AT&T to allow data to travel to subscribers without interference.

On the surface, this sounds fine. But in practice it makes little sense to treat each data packet precisely the same, regardless of whether it's streaming video or spam. Internet service providers should be able to pursue different pricing models. That will allow them to generate revenue needed for steady upgrades in technology.

Some consumer advocates fear that allowing different rates for "priority services" would lead to a world in which the regular Internet gets short shrift. That's not likely as long as competition remains robust — and consumers are able to "fire" one provider in favor of another.

To read the complete editorial, visit www.kansascity.com.

Read Next

Opinion

This is not what Vladimir Putin wanted for Christmas

By Markos Kounalakis

December 20, 2018 05:12 PM

Orthodox Christian religious leaders worldwide are weakening an important institution that gave the Russian president outsize power and legitimacy.

KEEP READING

MORE OPINION

Opinion

The solution to the juvenile delinquency problem in our nation’s politics

December 18, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

High-flying U.S. car execs often crash when when they run into foreign laws

December 13, 2018 06:09 PM

Opinion

Putin wants to divide the West. Can Trump thwart his plan?

December 11, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

George H.W. Bush, Pearl Harbor and America’s other fallen

December 07, 2018 03:42 AM

Opinion

George H.W. Bush’s secret legacy: his little-known kind gestures to many

December 04, 2018 06:00 AM

Opinion

Nicaragua’s ‘House of Cards’ stars another corrupt and powerful couple

November 29, 2018 07:50 PM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

McClatchy Washington Bureau App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Newsletters
Learn More
  • Customer Service
  • Securely Share News Tips
  • Contact Us
Advertising
  • Advertise With Us
Copyright
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service