content: Breitbart gives writers editorial independence, that's how you have people in the same site who complain against the gay lobby and Milo, who once wrote in clear terms that he enjoys being on the receiving end of penises belonging to well-endowed men of African-descent. That for me is interesting as how this position allows for views that are opposing to be in the same publication and let readers make their own informed decisions. Also, while I do disagree with their posture about net neutrality, I can see where they come from. Mistrust of governmental authority is one of the roots of American conservative thought and I can see how they believe that giving more control over of a medium that allows free-exchange of information, considering how the government already interferes in it - the many abuses of copyright law, violations of user privacy, use of secret courts orders to get information on internet users -  to the government has even more potential for abuse, especially when the chief of the FCC is appointed by the president.  At the same time, being against giving more control to gatekeepers in the private sector is something that is very in line with Breitbart's editorial tendencies - they used to [still do?] have regular posts on cord-cutting, for example, and their criticism of Mainstream Media in the Big Journalism section falls much in line with it. In all, they've been consistent in being against giving more parties control over the internet, be it to the government or private gate-keepers.  Edit: grammar, changed FTC to FCC, clarified a bit some portions