Okay. Can we admit that communication is not the same thing as information? That's a starting point. Information is facts and opinions about people, places, and things. Communication is the means of moving information around. These aren't legal definitions, of course, but it's useful for this example.

Not all information is created equal. Some information is feloniously wrong. This information is either libel or slander, depending. Other information can be hazardous or incendiary - for example, telling everyone there's a 90% off sale at a major store which you are planning to bomb is also illegal, just as shouting fire in a crowded auditorium. We want those people to be responsible for their words. As a result, we want information providers to be able to censor themselves without fear of reprisal.

What we DON'T want is the companies responsible for delivering that information to be responsible for those words. What we want from them is to treat all communication equally - they should be agnostic as to the content they are delivering. We also see that there is a necessity for better quality service, but it should not come at other's expense. If you want to pay for next day delivery, that's fine, but it shouldn't result in my normal shipping package being delayed. They should not slow me down because you paid more.

And yes, communication is more important than information. If anything, communication begets information. It is only through the exchange of ideas that we create culture, we create knowledge, we create civilization. Think of it this way: say you discover The Secret of the Universe. You have information. You know a thing. What good is it if you cannot speak? If you cannot write? Information may be wrong. It may be fallible. But communication is so important that we cannot allow it to fall to the whims of corporations, who would and have used their hold on it to alter the fate of nations.