Net neutrality goes back under the microscope
Net neutrality is one of those topics that's either really easy to ignore or really easy to get riled up about. It's easy to ignore because it's kind of complicated and it doesn't feel like something that's going to have an immediate impact on your life or business. But if you have a predilection for distrusting big government or big corporations, then it might be a topic that gets you to write a letter to your congressman.
No matter what camp you're in, it's probably worth providing a quick refresher on what exactly net neutrality is.
Equal in the eyes of the law
Net neutrality describes a state of being in which all data and users on the Internet are treated the same. It's also referred to as the open Internet. There's a concern among some groups that there could come a day that Internet service providers (ISPs) like Charter or Comcast might begin setting up a fast lane and a slow lane for Internet service, providing better bandwidth to companies that can pony up the cash.
To prevent such a scenario, advocacy groups are pushing the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to put regulations in place that would protect net neutrality.
In fact, the FCC did establish rules in 2010 that did prevent ISPs from playing favorites, but those rules were struck down by a federal appeals court decision in February regarding a suit brought against the FCC by Verizon, an ISP. As a result, we're kind of back to square one, with the FCC putting forth a new set of proposed regulations and seeking public comment.
“Now we're in this state of uncertainty,” said Tim Karr of Free Press, a Northampton-based group that advocates for an open Internet. “We now have an FCC that doesn't have any authority or hasn't re-established its authority to prevent ISPs from degrading or blocking Internet content.”
To ensure net neutrality, Free Press and many other groups are advocating that the FCC essentially start over and reclassify ISPs as common carriers, along the lines of the telephone industry. Currently, the FCC classifies ISPs in a much less regulated category.
Between the lines
If you read the statements of the FCC chairman, Tom Wheeler (who has worked within and lobbied for the cable industry), you'll find that he's saying all the right things, including that his agency is focused on keeping the Internet open for all people and businesses. But if you believe Karr, Wheeler's words and his goals are misaligned.
“There's kind of weird jujitsu going on,” Karr said. “Wheeler is keeping us happy with the rhetoric, but also keeping the cable lobby happy with the actual language” of the proposed regulations.
Of course, the folks at the cable lobby have a completely different view.
Brian Dietz, a spokesman for the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, says that regulating ISPs like common carriers won't protect consumers; it'll reduce innovation and investments in broadband infrastructure.
“How much innovation has come out of the telephone network?” Dietz asks. “There's dial tone and voicemail. That's it.”
He also argues that regulating ISPs like common carriers amounts to messing with the successful status quo.
“The Internet is working great now,” Dietz says. “You have business owners that use it every day. Why fix what isn't broken?”
Of course, there are those who simply say the government and the FCC should stay out of it altogether. Let the competitive markets do their jobs.
For Karr, that's a noble idea, but it's not realistic.
“While I think it's very easy to say we don't want the government involved in any way, the fact of the matter is the government has been involved,” he says. “It's not a question of regulating or not. It's a question of which regulations are the right ones to protect free speech online, and to protect the engine of innovation and economic development the Internet has become.”
If your head is spinning from the tit-for-tat rhetoric from these two opposing sides, you're not alone. As I talked to Karr and then Dietz, I found myself whipsawing from favoring one side to the other. That probably means that neither extreme is the right solution, but there must be a middle ground that prevents ISPs from favoring only the haves, while still keeping a light government touch to allow for private investments in the broadband network.
Let's just hope the FCC finds a path to that middle ground. If you want to help ensure that happens, visit fcc.gov/openinternet to read more about the issue, and go to fcc.gov/comments to share your views. The agency is collecting public input through the summer and hopes to finalize its new rules before the end of the year.
Christina Davis can be reached at cdavis@wbjournal.com.
WBJ Web Partners
Most Recent
Most Recent
0 Comments