This is simply a disagreement between content publishers and content distributors. When a big satellite TV provider acted unfavorably toward a few major televis

This is simply a disagreement between content publishers and content distributors. When a big satellite TV provider acted unfavorably toward a few major television networks during contract (re)-negotiation, those select few decided not to renew their license with the satellite TV company, causing viewers to ask why they can't get their favorite channel that their neighbor still gets. The internet works similarly in that an electronic contract is formed when an ISP attempts to access content on web server. The client/ISP "requests" the content, and the publisher agrees and serves it up. But there's nothing stopping a collective "big few" from denying access to the content based on the host name of the ISP requesting it. Ergo, if Verizon doesn't want to play "fair" with regards to content distribution, Facebook/Google/Twitter/Netflix/Reddit and whomever else could deny access to Verizon subscribers with an ol fashioned HTTP 403 or 401. Yes, traffic drops, people realize quickly that they can't access any of their favorite sites, things must be broken, and switch companies.