I suspect troll here, but what the hay.
Time and again we've stated that th epoint is that content providers and internet users ALREADY pay for access, so why should they pay again!
What the backbones are asking is to leapfrog over the ISP portion and charge content providers again to get guaranteed speeds. Content providers already pay hosting/access fees usually based on bandwidth usage. Why should they have to pay twice.
Uggh.. I hate it when you guys keep saying "The ISP's don't get it..."
The whole offering of the priority service to the content provider's is to give them another speed offering similar to how you can buy different service tiers from your ISP.
What is wrong with a content provider paying a bit more for better than best effort Internet delivery? If customer's are capable of paying for higher speed access, why aren't content provider's capable of paying for faster service? The Internet is not a guaranteed service offering, if Bell South/SBC or whoever is guaranteeing a speed, then you have the option to take it or not!
I just think that it's funny that you guys keep blaming the ISP for creating a service that is charging content provider's more money.... (Kind of ironic that CNET is a content provider!).
I think it would be a great idea if I can guarantee a tv over IP service to my users if I pay a bit more without worrying that someone else is using up the pipe for something else!
Don't half the content provider's pay Akamai millions of dollars a year to host their content so it can be delivered faster?
WHO DOESN'T GET IT? Stop brainwashing your users.. it's nice to have a 50 foot view and blame everything without any real thought!

Chowhound
Comic Vine
GameFAQs
GameSpot
Giant Bomb
TechRepublic