F.C.C. to Try Again on ‘Net Neutrality’ but still no nipples

Again the venerable NY Times blushes: F.C.C. to Try Again on ‘Net Neutrality’, the old paper reports. But not neutral on nipples, or breasts.

The FCC, nominally in charge of internet service in the country, recently ruled that internet service has to be neutral, that is, it cannot discriminate between users. Same prices, same access to all. The federal court reversed that ruling on a technicality, and so the FCC has announced that it will again institute net neutrality, But on grounds that won’t violate any technicality.

Marquel asked to interview the director of the FCC, and voilà, what should be done, was done. The director’s office dwarfed the White House’s Oval room, with mahogany all over the place and mahogany veneer placed over the mahogany. Truly the land of mahogany and it worked. An air of seriousness seemed to burden Marquel’s usual friskiness.

“I was wondering how committed you are to neutrality,” said l.

“Absolutely,” said the director. “As neutral as the Swiss.”

“Do they have net neutrality?” I asked.

“They’re neutral, aren’t they?” He asked, “so I assume they do.”

“Are you sure we’re talking about the same thing?” I asked. “My understanding is that it is the net and its operators that are neutral or supposed to be, not the government. That means they can’t turn the internet into something resembling cable tv where some sites might require higher connection fees, like a double tier for HBO or other premium sites.”

“Well we are in favor of net neutrality,” he repeated.

“But unless you really believe in equality as an element of neutrality it’s possible that the plans to combine Comcast with Time Warner will create such a powerful monopoly that they will demand a kind of two tier system on the net, a demand difficult to resist.” I insisted.

“Well that merger is not yet official,” said the director.

I couldn’t avoid the paintings on the wall. Some were classical landscapes. Others were also classical but figure studies, with the genitals and breasts, and even bottoms, covered with what appeared to be authentic fig leaves. “Why are those pictures covered like that?”

“You mean the fig leaves? That’s in case children wander in here. Don’t want them damaged,” he answered.

“You mean the paintings and that sculpture?” I asked, pointing to a Venus diMilo with a total of four fig leaves on strategic areas.

“No of course not. We don’t want the children damaged by seeing breasts or nipples, or zizettes.”

“Zizettes?” I asked.

“Yes, that’s French for female private parts.” He explained.

“I always thought,” said I, “that it was baby talk for female private parts. And since when is a bottom forbidden?”

“Oh, we would never allow that on broadcast tv during daytime hours. That’s our standard. If it’s not fit for broadcast it’s not fit for the office.” He informed me.

“Interesting,” was all I could muster.

“So have I answered all your questions?” He asked.

“I’m still a bit troubled by your vision of neutrality. Is it enforcement of equality for all users or is it a kind of hands off treatment?” I asked.

“A little of both. Net neutrality in every way.” He asserted.

“But we need the FCC to enforce it, not to keep its hands off.” I said. Then I couldn’t resist. “Tell me do you still believe that Janet Jackson’s nipple was harmful to kids?”

“Well of course.” He said.

“But it was so brief. How could something so small and so brief be harmful?” I insisted.

“Small? Was it small? Is it small? That was never the argument. It was always that it was so brief.” He said.

“Well,” I answered, “I guess I’m adding to the argument.”

“It’s not a good argument.” He challenged. I looked him in the eye and furrowed my brows. “By your argument, small nipples would be allowed and large ones would not. We would have to enact a rule about nipple size. I don’t know how we would do it. Small in relation to the person, the breast, or objectively in inches?”

Again I was unable to resist. “I suppose you’re right. We’d have to take account of temperature, too.” He looked at me as if I were the jerk and I guess, for a moment he was right. But I was troubled that this kind of thinking would be how net neutrality might be enforced. “Wouldn’t it be better just to declare the internet a public utility, like phones, electricity, and water? Then nobody would expect to be treated specially. No two tiers or anything. You pay, you get complete access.”

“We’ll just have to see. We will enact rules about net neutrality and I promise you we will.” He said.

That’s what I was afraid of. They’ll have hearings about every detail, inch, and degree.

He interrupted my wandering thoughts by holding the door open for me to leave. He asked, “Were they really that small, Janet’s nipples?”

I didn’t know what to say, so I added, “I think there was only one but too brief to measure and, as you say, little basis for comparison.”

“Exactly,” he said with satisfaction.

You may follow Marquel on Twitter @MarquelatTPV