The article seems deliberately deceptive, entirely ignoring the second half of what it claims net neutrality means except to criticize Google for not treating a

The article seems deliberately deceptive, entirely ignoring the second half of what it claims net neutrality means except to criticize Google for not treating all the bits it sends the same, and then encouraging us to think net neutrality creates a "bevy of regulations" for Google's competitors. What new regulations apply to non ISPs? How does net neutrality change that other companies have to make deals with service providers? There's no argument here, just a complaint that Google is huge which, while probably valid, seems irrelevant.