Slashdot Mirror
Burger King Makes the Case For Net Neutrality (variety.com)
An anonymous reader writes: By now you've probably seen Burger King's spoof ad on the decision by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission to repeal net neutrality. In the ad, Burger King customers are informed that there are now three "lanes" for ordering Whoppers -- each with substantially different prices and waiting times. The ad has already generated over a million views on Youtube and is lighting up Twitter. One thing I missed the first time is that while the Burger King "counter service" is clearly in on the act, the customers are apparently real; they learn of the cockamamie scheme at the counter in the style of the old TV show Candid Camera. Variety notes that the video "ends with an apparent dig at FCC Chairman Ajit Pai [...] as the Burger King character is shown drinking from an oversized Reese's coffee mug. That is the type of coffee mug that Pai uses at FCC meetings."
Not exactly, but they do confuse the issue. If you notice, only the Wopper is being delayed, and it's being delayed despite being able to be served faster. Other sandwiches like Chicken (as pointed out in the ad) do not require waiting in the slow line.
If we assume Woppers are a substitute for torrents then the net neutrality parallel is obvious - unfortunately the target audience for the commercial won't make the connection.
seems more like you don't understand how an analogy works. the set of all hamburger restaurants isn't "the internet" in this case. this single BK restaurant is "the internet", or monopoly gateway to is. in the context of the ad, the whopper is like netflix or something. you can get the chicken sandwich, which is the ISP video, with no delays. but you may have to wait (or get your whopper throughput throttled) if you don't pay for a premium line. the analogy totally works, if you don't attempt to over-analyze it with "that's not really how..." irrelevant reasoning.
You're wrong. Burger King's analogy is that they'll let you pay more for faster priority access to their product. To accomplish this, they will artificially slow down access to those that are unwilling to pay the ridiculous premium. Those customers that were waiting forever for their burgers weren't waiting because there were many customers that pay the premium, they were waiting just because the premium option existed and they didn't pony up. That's the entire point of their analogy and is perfectly valid.