Mendacious

The WaPo thinks net neutrality is stupid:

The weakest aspect of the neutrality case is that the dangers it alleges are speculative. It seems unlikely that broadband providers will degrade Web services that people want and far more likely that they will use non-neutrality to charge for upgrading services that depend on fast and reliable delivery, such as streaming high-definition video or relaying data from heart monitors. If this proves wrong, the government should step in. But it should not burden the Internet with preemptive regulation.

Speculative? Hmmm...

William L. Smith, chief technology officer for Atlanta-based BellSouth Corp., told reporters and analysts that an Internet service provider such as his firm should be able, for example, to charge Yahoo Inc. for the opportunity to have its search site load faster than that of Google Inc.

[...]

Smith, echoing recent sentiments by AT&T Inc. chief executive Edward E. Whitacre Jr., responded that network operators must be free to control the type and quality of service on the system in which they have invested heavily.

Well, maybe CTO Smith and CEO Whitacre were misunderstood. Maybe it was a case of poor reporting and poor editing. What newspaper was that again? Oh, yeah: The Washington Post.

Once again the WaPo's editorial board reveals that they don't read their own damn newspaper.


.