Google has issued a response to the thousands of news articles that have popped up since it first discussed its ideas for an end to net neutrality. Ever since Google announced a proposal with wireless provider Verizon that would put an end to net neutrality and tier up Internet services in the US, the story has been in the headlines pretty much every day.
Seemingly every few hours, someone had something new to say about the proposal that would have users paying more for higher speeds on the Internet, paying different amounts for different content, and forcing content creators to be categorized and pay for the kind of content they wanted to put online.
For the vast majority, Google and Verizon became targets. Critics blasted their proposal, saying
In a blog post hundreds of words long, Google's Washington counsel for public policy on telecommunication issues Richard Whitt tried to dispel some of the inaccuracies that have been thrown out in the media.
"We don’t expect everyone to agree with every aspect of our proposal, but there has been a number of inaccuracies about it, and we do want to separate fact from fiction," wrote Whitt.
The first point he makes is to try to convince people that Google has not "sold out" as some critics have said. "Google has been the leading corporate voice on the issue of network neutrality over the past five years. No other company is working as tirelessly for an open Internet," he said, noting that the only reason the company put its proposal out is because of concern for the public interest.
He also added that Google and Verizon aren't trying to become public policymakers, but rather just concerned citizens in the process.
While the reception to the companies' joint proposal has been overwhelmingly negative, I don't necessarily buy that it should be treated as all nice and warm either. Google and Verizon obviously think they're better than everyone else by telling the entire country how the Internet should be operated.
Regardless, we still know that any major change to the industry will require support from Washington and, well, let's just say their efficiency doesn't exactly have the best track record.