>The Economist article is written with the presumption that there are are problems that need non-neutrality in order to be solved and that there is thus a trade

>The Economist article is written with the presumption that there are are problems that need non-neutrality in order to be solved and that there is thus a tradeoff of some sort to be made. This is the absolute classic form of media psychic manipulation: present a false choice and allow endless debate within this window but never question what might lie outside it. Additionally, one side of the debate is accepted as the default and alternatives are only evaluated relative to this one viewpoint. Another current example is the "work life balance" "debate" as it relates to social media. We are constantly told that we should "unplug" and "find time for ourselves," assuming that the majority of the time we are "plugged" and devoting our energies, via elaborate and exciting abstractions, to some distant venture capital fund. One relevant term of art here is the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window