Seeing all of the unbelievably dishonest arguments being made against net neutrality, I have to wonder if the people making them really are this clueless or if they’re just shameless liars. Sandy Rios of the American Family Association provides a perfect example:
Like other conservatives who have criticized the proposed rules , Rios doesn’t seem to grasp the meaning of net neutrality, but that didn’t stop her from accusing the administration of using the internet proposal as part of a plan to “take down” Fox News and “go after” Rush Limbaugh.
“They want to manage the content, they want to control what goes into the internet,” Rios said. “Thank God for the internet, thank God for our ability to communicate to you through our Facebook pages and through AFA and our alerts and everything. And this all is being threatened.”
What Rios lacked in an understanding of net neutrality she made up in a strong, personal feeling that the Obama administration will crack down on free speech: “Certainly we know that the president and the administration is willing to do whatever they can to stop the flow of information to the American people, we know that that’s true.”
This is so overwhelmingly contrary to reality that it can only be the result of rank dishonesty or willful ignorance. If anything, the exact opposite is true: Net neutrality will protect the free flow of information on the internet by preventing ISPs from blocking or slowing down content from sites they can’t extort for money (or just disapprove of). Net neutrality maintains the internet the way it has always been from the very beginning. It doesn’t establish government control over the flow of information in any way whatsoever.
Are they really this dumb? Or are they just lying?