[So much catchier than "net neutrality." Besides, Gleichschaltung is a word everybody should know.]

Of course, the Pravda on the Potomac has cable interests. And poor Lil Debbie and Jim "***" Brady got beat up pretty bad by bloggers... So you'd expect these guys to want the Internet to [cough] work like cable does. From today's editorial pages:

The advocates of neutrality suggest, absurdly, that a non-neutral Internet would resemble cable TV: a medium through which only corporate content is delivered. This analogy misses the fact that the market for Internet connections, unlike that for cable television, is competitive:

And as soon as these guys end net neutrality, what's to keep the market competitive? The guys with the biggest pipes--that is, the biggest corporations--are going to freeze out or buy up all the littler guys.

More than 60 percent of Zip codes in the United States are served by four or more broadband providers that compete to give consumers what they want -- fast access to the full range of Web sites, including those of their kids' soccer league, their cousins' photos, MoveOn.org and the Christian Coalition.

So 40% of the market is already monopolized, right? So much for the "absurdity" of the Internet becoming like cable..

If one broadband provider slowed access to fringe bloggers, the blogosphere would rise up in protest -- and the provider would lose customers.

Gosh, I'd say "fringe" is a little tendentious, wouldn't you? And how would we "rise up" in protest when access had already been slowed? And in a monopoly situation, where would we go?

Remember:

1. These are the guys who already sold our data to the Feds, violating any confidentiality agreement they made with us, and

2. AOL has already censored online opponents of its email tax.

Thanks, WaPo, for being the corporate shills we always knew that you were.

NOTE Gleichschaltung.