But they didn't explain both sides. They gave a summary of the claims of both sides but no way to judge how likely such an outcome was. Do you really think that such a person understands the issues? Furthermore, the argument in favor said nothing about letting Internet development remain free vs letting it be managed and strangled by government regulation.
Furthermore, here was the final question:
Q15: So, in conclusion, do you favor or oppose the proposal to give Internet Service Providers the freedom to:
• provide websites the option to give their visitors the ability to download material at a higher speed, for a fee, while providing a slower download speed for other websites
• block access to certain websites
• charge their customers an extra fee to gain access to certain websites
Are you in favor of extra expense, a faster download speed for the elite but slower for you, blocked access to certain sites, additional fees? I don't think that those supporting the FCC's action today would characterize the likely result of their action this way.