Pretty good analysis
As a left-ponder I've noticed the fall from civility and reasonable discourse here - but not only here, just that when you're close, it's certainly louder.
I happen to be "for" NN as Wheeler put it forth. It's worked well for most of the people I know.
But it hasn't mattered to me, as I can't get enough bandwidth in rural VA for it to really matter how much someone charges differentially for their own content that I can't use, or someone else's I can't use. No one's willing to let me download it overnight so I can watch it the next day, at least if I don't cheat and pirate it (which is frankly, too much bother, the stuff is mostly not that good anyway).
None of this would matter if there wasn't this vertical integration via merger. IMO if you don't like the way it is, that's perhaps worth a look. If content creation and ownership were separate from the pipes that push the content around, there wouldn't be much issue...There'd be no reason for AT&T or Comcast to prefer one content source over another. That's the real source of problems the way I see things.
The other source of real problems is that...the best bandwidth I can get outside an expensive satellite plan with high latency is 4 mbit down and 1 up. I have NO choice. The big cable companies have shown their evil disregard for all of us by their anti-competitive law buying (one touch make ready and friends that make it illegal for even the people/government to create competition, and collusion to not step on each other's turf).\
So, at this point, personally it doesn't matter to me if Comcast (who I don't have the option to pay, perhaps I'm lucky) wants to charge more for out of network content, or AT&T, Verizon, Cox cable and so on - none of them are available to me anyway.
But I still resist the trend that's been going on for the 6+ decades of my life of the best law corporate money can buy, which is what we seem to be seeing here.