On one hand he would say that companies like Verizon and AT&T would never violate the net neutrality principle by favoring certain websites over others because their customers would hate it. Then he would turn around and say something like...why shouldn't websites have to pay like everyone else? He was directly contradicting his previous statement, which I did my best to point out.

Another major flaw in his argument in my view is that he insisted that there were currently no rules that dictate net neutrality. This is untrue - the concept of net neutrality has been in place in our nation's telecom policy since they started pounding in the telephone poles. The reason we are having this debate at this moment is that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), backed by a Supreme Court decision, decided to deregulate cable and DSL Internet services; in the process the old "common carrier" neutrality regulations will no longer apply when the order goes into effect (in about three months). So until then companies are forbidden to discriminate against content providers, or applications users might choose, like Vonage or Skype for VoIP. Congress might redo what the FCC undid, and I think telecom industry advocates like Mr. Cleland are worried they just might.

If you heard or watched the show, tell me what you thought.