>"Competition ensures that companies do not have the leverage to discriminate against particular websites," Shapiro added. What competition? I've got the "cho

>"Competition ensures that companies do not have the leverage to discriminate against particular websites," Shapiro added. What competition? I've got the "choice" between AT&T or Comcast. Both suck hugely, but in different ways. I'm sure both will not hesitate to force companies to cut them checks to push their bits to my computer. > It's crony capitalism in favor of web giants like Facebook and Google. That's why they support net neutrality, since it targets their competitors. How? My company can't afford to pay every ISP for priority access to fast lanes, but our larger, entrenched competitors can. Maybe it's just my bias, but I only see these kinds of arguments from heavily right leaning sources, and to my mind they miss the mark every time. I don't understand how allowing ISPs to block or throttle companies that don't cut them whatever checks they ask for isn't anti-competitive, and how it could possibly promote competition in an industry full of natural monopolies.