Isn't that ultimately what a free market is designed to do?

If only Comcast provides broadband where I live, and Comcast owns NBC, then Comcast is conflicted in providing content their subsidiaries did not create. I have no other ISP options if I want (or need, maybe for business, as I do) broadband. That maximizes freedom for Comcast. Which is why the Comcasts of the world are doing the happy dance over this.

But it minimizes my freedom. I am at the mercy of one provider. But if that provider is required to be agnostic to content flowing across its wires, then I make those choices.

That's closest to a "free market" defined as buyers and sellers being free to meet in a marketplace. In a world without Net Neutrality, Comcast gets to choose which sellers come to the market (or how they can present at the market), and since they own some of the sellers, they are conflicted.

So have at it if you want to create a world where all markets have many broadband ISPs to choose from. You'll have to deal with both economic and regulatory barriers. Just do that first before you allow conflicted ISPs the ability to restrict consumer choice.
[Post edited by hoolstoptheheels at 11/22/2017 3:42PM]