You can master many complex issues by filling a table like this one with people who have
competing interests, and watching them argue different sides of the issue. Unfortunately, this
approach breaks down when the topic is highly technical. For example, in the current debate on
“network neutrality” in the Internet, I’ve seen advocates from all sides advance their agendas by
giving misleading simplifications of how the Internet actually works and of what “neutrality”
might mean. From that, I don’t see how any non-expert could tell what the issue is about, much
less what to do about it. I could not separate substance from rhetoric until I did my own
assessment, rooted in the technology of the Internet.