This applies to the internet, not TV or movies. Your ISP won’t be able to hinder your access to websites which they may not favor.
You mean they will have to use a different technique to hinder your access ?
Who is "they" the ISP, or the Government?
Lotsa luck on that. Never forget the gov't tendency to give benign names and descriptions to hideous legislation and regulation. Does 'The Affordable Care Act' ring a bell? Also keep in mind that major bill descriptions are often appended with the verbiage: "... and other purposes." (Hint: have a look at John Dingell's early draft PDF version of the ACA...)
I've listened to explanations from non-governmental, apolitical experts on both sides of the net neutrality argument and I'm honestly so confused that I have no idea which side to fall on.
One thing is for sure, though: letting the FCC get it's grubby paws on the internet has the potential for catastrophic, out-of-control "unintended consequences". (See again, the ACA...)
These people are not on your side.
>> This applies to the internet, not TV or movies.
Movies are streamed through the internet, along with some TV shows. Netflix, Amazon, Hulu, you name it.
On top of that, TV is carried on digital signals now thanks to the FCC. This has been the case since 2009 (remember that whole mess of making old TV sets receive digital signals?):
http://www.fcc.gov/digital-television
As the cherry on the crap sundae, movies at theaters have been transitioning to digital as well. It makes movies easier to distribute and take advantage of new video technologies. It also makes it easier to fold them under digital media regulations.
http://natoonline.org/initiatives/cinema-technologies/
As soon as they announced that TV was converting to digital for no really good reason and that it was the FCC that was managing the whole thing, I predicted that the government would use the fact that practically all video would be digital to clamp down on internet free speech with a few well placed laws (except for that pesky First Amendment, of course).
LOL! You mean sites like Pirate Bay?
The net neutrality argument is mostly about whether or not ISP's should be allowed to play favorites with bandwidth.
The free market position would clearly be to let the ISP's do whatever they want to do with their own bandwidth so as to maximize their income. Problem is, most of those "ISP's" are really phone companies and cable companies which exist in a tightly regulated environment already, have high and artificial barriers to entry, and have a long history of politically directed investment. So they aren't exactly free market entities to begin with.