Nice sound bites, wrong conclusion

I rather liked The Economist’s end-December opinion piece on the FCC’s handling of Net Neutrality.  The magazine prides itself on the quality of its prose, and this short article didn’t disappoint.  For example, in comparing the arguments for and against neutrality, The Economist offers this:

‘From a consumer’s perspective, both sides are half right. Without some neutrality rules it is unclear how a network operator can be stopped from blocking particular sites or services. But overly prescriptive rules that fossilise the internet in its current form could indeed hamper innovation’.

And, in relation to the FCC’S recent rule-making:

‘..the fact that zealots on both sides are moaning about the new regime finally passed by America’s telecoms regulator on December 21st is on the whole a good sign’.

Where I part company with the editorial is its overall conclusion that ‘the fundamental problem’ in the US is the absence of a wholesale market in internet access.  But that’s a very long story…