An op-ed on net neutrality, framed through an extended analogy: a delivery driver who opens packages to decide how much extra to charge based on their contents, even though both sender and recipient already pay for shipping. The driver justifies the surcharge by claiming a business interest (helping a cousin's competing store) and later hides behind shifting claims about which “authority” governs his conduct — a stand-in for the FCC's December 2017 rollback of net neutrality rules under Chair Ajit Pai, and the subsequent Justice Department lawsuit against California's own net neutrality law.
The piece argues that net neutrality rules are not government “interference” with the internet, but a basic protection against internet service providers discriminating against — or charging extra for — data based on its content, framing this as a matter of free speech and fair competition rather than regulatory overreach.
@misc{amer2018netneutrality,
author = {Amer, Ahmed},
title = {Net neutrality explained: The digital postman shouldn't charge twice},
year = {2018},
month = oct,
day = {6},
howpublished = {Open Forum, San Francisco Chronicle},
url = {https://www.sfchronicle.com/opinion/openforum/article/Net-neutrality-explained-The-digital-postman-13287823.php}
}