NetFlix knows that the ISPs are already pissed at them and are moving to throttle them, so they fire back by showing consumers which of the ISPs are a better fit for their NetFlix viewing habits. NetFlix is flexing its muscle a bit here to show it can redirect customers to choose different ISPs and affect their bottom line.
I, too, like that Netflix is giving out this kind of information, but let's remember that in the USA many people have two or even just one choice. I have my choice of Comcast cable or AT&T DSL for broadband. That's it. And I'm not 100% sure that AT&T DSL would actually work in my building, and it's top speed is 6Mb/s compared to Comcast's 12Mb/s (or maybe 15Mb/s, I forget). Plus, AT&T: the only company I can think of with worse customer service than Comcast.
So while I like that they're giving out this information I'm not sure it's going to be a good idea to piss off ISPs with this near monopoly situation in many parts of the USA.
It's even worse: I live in Tucson, and I have two "choices:" Qwest DSL, with a max download speed of 1.5 mb/sec, or Comcast cable, which offers 1.5, 7, or 12. In other words, I have one real choice.
So while this information would have been worth its weight in gold as a threat to the ISPs its now released where it can do all the damage its going to do. If the impact is found to be negligible than Netflix has lost what little leverage it has over the ISPs.
Verizon FIOS looks like the best chance at breaking the monopolies' backs, but it seems to be slow going - I haven't had it available in any of the last four places I've lived in in very dense NYC and Bay Area, yet my parents in rural Maryland who live next to cows have had it for at least four years.
Remember that "the others" with whom "Netflix does not play well" include members of the RIAA, the MPAA, and primary backers of ACTA. I'm sure you're also aware that cable operators have a similarly anti-customer track record in Washington DC.
These not-minor details matter. Why? Because the audience is also part of "the entertainment ecosystem". Suing them, DRMing them, and bribing their elected representatives in Congress all count as fundamentally offensive - and all that was going on well before Netflix could get anyone to return its calls.
I'm not saying that your advice isn't good. I'm just saying that Netflix isn't the first company to which it should be directed.
A gift from my employer - http://lh4.ggpht.com/_kt8r19d1Kpw/TUCXRpFxEjI/AAAAAAAAA_Y/t_...
(context - http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/13/business/media/13bewkes.ht...)
And Bewkes is probably a bit more pissed about http://www.google.com/finance?chdnp=1&chdd=1&chds=1&...
First, this is next to useless from a consumer perspective. Because anyone whose actually tested a single provider can tell you speeds vary by geography. Time Warner might be middle of the pack overall but the fastest in your particular area.
Second, they're really p#ss#ng off the ISPs here. If you want faster bandwidth out of the ISPs its better to privately talk to them than publicly embarrass them.
Finally this reinforces the reputation Netflix is already getting among content producers which is the company doesn't play well with others. There's a reason why the head of HBO and Time Warner are taking hard lines against Netflix.
Bottom line: Netflix is part of a content delivering ecosystem. If they offend every other part of that ecosystem it will be much harder for them to survive in the future