The Administration Violates Its Own Net Neutrality Rule – Arbitrarily Blocks & Discrimnates Access to Our Internet Content, Services

by Mike Wendy on October 7, 2013

Uncle Sam – the incumbent, monopoly provider of federal government services and access to its Internet content – has violated its own Net Neutrality rule.

It’s blocking access to lawful content and service functionality (which we’ve paid for), as exemplified on these federal websites:

FCCDOJFTCAnd, it’s apparently discriminating content it favors over others, as here:


This arbitrary and capricious hissy fit is exactly why we don’t want the government controlling the Internet – come next crisis, who knows which information gets blocked or doesn’t; or whose site gets favorable treatment over others.  Instead of neutrality, access could all depend on which side of the fence you sit in relation to the current leadership.  And that ain’t right.

The irony here is that the FCC’s Net Neutrality rule was based on zero market analysis and, at most, four specious incidents of content blocking.  In other words, it was created to prevent imagined, not real, behaviors.

Since the idea of Net Neutrality was introduced almost a decade ago (even before it became law), trillions upon trillions of Internet communications have crossed private U.S. internet providers without a single formal Net Neutrality complaint / violation.  We can’t say the same for poor old Uncle Sam – as we see above, he’s repeatedly violated his own rule.

Of course, the Net Neutrality rule is bogus.  But, if it has to be on the books, all should comply with its proscriptions. Stated differently, if the industry has to do it, “essential” Uncle Sam should stop violating Net Neutrality, too!

Do as I say, not as I do is a crummy way to run a government.  A great way of reducing this crumminess would be avoiding the creation of dubious rules in the first place.

txpatriot October 8, 2013 at 2:21 pm

C’mon Mike — bogus arguments like this don’t help to advance the cause of pointing out how ridiculous net neutrality rules really are.

You know as well as I do that NN rules apply only to ISPs. The FCC is not an ISP — they are a content creator and as such they can determine which content to display on their own webpage.

Can we get back to the real issue and leave this B.S. to the crazies?

Mike Wendy October 8, 2013 at 8:15 pm

It’s rhetorical – what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Additionally, the government actions reveal an arbitrariness / pettiness that belies “neutrality”; and if the FCC or the admin were to somehow wrest control of the Internet (through regulation or executive order), this is what we could expect in times of crisis (or, well, far less).

Regardless, the actions do not befit the government – which should be designed to help the People, not to purposely, spitefully block / discriminate content / services to “prove a point.”

txpatriot October 9, 2013 at 5:40 pm

It may be rhetorical to you. It isn’t to all those re-tweeting your article like it’s the gospel truth.

Mike Wendy October 9, 2013 at 6:28 pm

I think if you read through it’s clear, but I take your point.

I think the government, if it were indeed concerned about our digital easements – as seen in its Net Neutrality proscriptions – would see in its own incumbent, monopoly actions a bit of hypocrisy. And these website closures show a level of arbitrary and capriciousness that should concern us all with so much going through Uncle Sam, the FCC and its numerous other, largely unaccountable agencies.

Thanks for your input.

txpatriot October 10, 2013 at 6:17 pm

Always a pleasure Mike.

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: