I'm a big fan of Klavan- been getting his email articles for a long time now. But I think he's wrong about net neutrality. What he's saying about it makes no sense- it's not even vaguely like the Fairness Doctrine, which he seems to be confusing it with.

One could even argue that net neutrality favors conservatives, because it safeguards alternate media views, just like talk radio. Pajamas TV is a good example of a conservative group that benefits from net neutrality. I'm afraid to say it, but the only explanation I can think of is that Klavan is confused about what NN is, which is very frustrating, considering that we conservatives are often pummeled for not understanding the Internet, and in this case, it seems to be true. Someone needs to communicate this to Klavan so he can fix it.

This is the sort of talk that boosts those who already agree but will not change the minds of those who don't.

To reach people who have different points of view you need both more emotion and more facts. Not necessarily in the same talk. Klaven touches lightly on too many topics to be persuasive, somebody should approach this kind of censorship, or whatever it is, from a more scholarly point of view. Telling people to shut up isn't exactly censorship, though, and a different description of it is needed.

I also am confused by Klaven's approach to net neutrality. It is genuinely complex and needs clarification, not rough summaries.

"This is the sort of talk that boosts those who already agree but will not change the minds of those who don't." Which is itself a laudable and useful purpose.