Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Not-So-Neutral Net
The FCC’s new rules on Net Neutrality open the Internet to corporate discrimination. But it’s not too late to preserve Internet freedom.
The Internet was created as an “open” or “neutral” platform, and net neutrality is the principle that ensures that Internet providers can’t interfere with a user’s ability to access any content on the Web, whether it’s a community blog, a YouTube video, or a major news site. It’s essentially the First Amendment of the Internet.
In late December, the Federal Communications Commission enacted new rules on net neutrality—rules that are supposed to protect Internet users from discrimination and to prevent Internet providers like AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon from acting as gatekeepers on the Web.
But the FCC missed the mark, and its rules not only fail to protect Internet users, but bolster the big phone and cable companies’ ability to carve up the Internet among themselves. As Net Neutrality champion Senator Al Franken said, the rules are “simply inadequate to protect consumers or preserve the free and open Internet.”
During the presidential campaign, Barack Obama came out strongly in favor of net neutrality, saying he would “take a back seat to no one” on the issue. But in the end, Obama's FCC chairman, Julius Genachowski, failed to deliver on the president’s promise, instead issuing ambiguous rules riddled with loopholes that corporate lobbyists will easily undermine.
Over the past several years, the phone and cable companies have flooded Washington with millions of dollars and hundreds of lobbyists to buy support in Congress and put pressure on the FCC. Public interest groups and a few lawmakers have tried to fight back, and more than two million people have urged the FCC to adopt strong net neutrality rules, but Chairman Genachowski ultimately caved to industry demands and turned a deaf ear to the public.
What Went Wrong: Real vs. Fake Net Neutrality
At its core, real net neutrality is a clear rule of non-discrimination that governs all Internet providers. It means that your provider can’t slow down your service in order to speed up someone else’s. It means that your provider can’t exploit legal loopholes to slow down your access to Netflix while speeding up Hulu because it happens to own Hulu. It means that there’s one Internet, whether you access it from your home computer or your mobile phone.
But the rules that the FCC passed in December are vague and weak. The limited protections that were placed on wired connections, the kind you access through your home computer, leave the door open for the phone and cable companies to develop fast and slow lanes on the Web and to favor their own content or applications.
Worse, the rules also explicitly allow wireless
carriers—mobile phone companies like AT&T and Verizon—to block
applications for any reason and to degrade and de-prioritize websites
you access using your cell phone or a device like an iPad. That means
these companies could block something like the music service Pandora,
while offering unlimited access to its own preferred applications, like
VCast.
We’re already seeing what a world without real Net Neutrality will look like. Just weeks after the FCC’s vote, MetroPCS, the nation’s fifth-largest wireless carrier, announced new plans that would block popular applications like Skype and Netflix while favoring YouTube. This is particularly egregious because MetroPCS serves a lower-income audience that is increasingly moving toward the mobile Web as their only way to get online.
Some companies are already marketing “deep packet inspection” technology that would allow carriers to nickel-and-dime you by charging you every time you visit Facebook or try to stream a Vimeo video. If MetroPCS gets away with its scheme—which appears to violate even the FCC’s weak rules—you can bet that AT&T and Verizon will waste no time in unveiling their own plans, which would mean higher bills and fewer choices on the mobile Web.
Lastly, the FCC’s short-sighted action failed to contend with a series of drastic deregulatory decisions made during the Bush administration that severely hamstrung the FCC’s ability to oversee the phone and cable companies. By failing to restore the agency’s authority over broadband, the FCC risks seeing even these rules tossed out in court.
The FCC rules were designed to appease the phone and cable companies—but even that didn’t work. Verizon has already filed suit against the agency, showing that these gatekeepers will settle for nothing less than total deregulation and a toothless FCC.
Undoing the Damage
The FCC’s new rules are certainly a setback in the quest to protect the Web as an open platform and an integral piece of our communications infrastructure and our democracy. In the absence of clear FCC authority and oversight of the Internet and a strong Net Neutrality framework that protects your right to go wherever you want, whenever you want online, AT&T, Comcast, and Verizon are free to interfere with your Internet experience.
The FCC still has the opportunity to put in place a solid framework that would put the public interest above the profit motive of the phone and cable companies that it is supposed to regulate. And the FCC should take immediate steps to close the loopholes it created, to strengthen its rules, and to include wireless protections. The fight is far from over. We can work to change the rules, demand better oversight and consumer protections and make sure that the big companies can’t pad their bottom lines on the backs of their customers.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...

10 Comments so far
Show AllWho are you trying to kid... THis Fight is over with it was like bringing a creadit card to a Cash by the barrel full fight... the net belongs to the cash and carry crowd and the American Peolple on carry plastic...
As I've mentioned elsewhere: signs of the ultimate descent into the New Dark Ages, where hardly anybody knows what's going on, and just fighting for survival.
Whoever controls the media, controls the mind.
Jim Morrison
The author wrote: "The FCC still has the opportunity to put in place a solid framework that would put the public interest above the profit motive of the phone and cable companies that it is supposed to regulate."
________________*
Silly! The FCC didn't screw us by mistake. It was a calculated move. Now you want the same agency to undo what it did for profit?! Naive!
We need to make clear to Obama and all other MEDIA CONTROL zombies that if he doesn't reverse this, and/or continues to threaten the future the internet, we will organize to get his arse out of office.
Absolutely. It looks like most of the posters here got it anyway. We live in a plutocracy, and the article makes out like we dont live in a plutocracy, and they got it wrong by mistake.
The beginning and the end is the word. Therefore, who controls the word controls the outcomes.
While it will be a pity to lose access to the net, the net is the word only if we allow it to be so.
If we do we deserve what we get.
Consider:
We are not primarily international; we are local. We stand not in the ether, but in the mud.
Unless we give the net the status it is almost wholly ineffectual on its own. What values are attracted by its connection do not come out of its connection. There are other connections and if values in the net are eradicated or excluded they will of course disappear there, but they will remain elsewhere. Numbers make no difference for the quality of good here. In fact the numbers on the net make matters worse. For proof look at the behaviour of the USA, on of the most connected countries in the world. Obama was elected on the strength of a campaign run on the net proving the net is already controlled; already has the idiots by the balls, which in the way of idiots makes them feel wise and valued.
One or a hundred million idiots are equally idiotic but a hundred million idiots in concert are far more dangerous than one. The net aids the spread of idiocy far more fluently than it aids the spread of solid values.
Love your neighbour, speak your mind wherever and let the net babble away as idiots always do. Don't expect anything more and you will remain sane.
True,
After DARPA the net used to be primarily for academic use before it got polluted by the World Wide Web of mindless commercial spam and faux News screaming. In the 70's (usenet) and 80's commercial plugs and quoting out of context were unforgivable sins that got you banned. Now the net seems to be largely a blogersphere where anything goes, infested by uneducated minds bent on personal intolerance, while at the same time accepting of torture, war, government corruption and sadistic brutality and violence. Most users pretty much parrot every thing they see on TV which has become 100 percent crap. Nothing but mindless violence and police state remedies are on most of the sorry excuses for channels.
I think we're going to have to go to local nets, like they did in Alameda, CA. Local nerds have put up an array of transmitters and pooled their connection ports to speed up the net for all. This way too, One ISP that blocks a site is just bypassed for another on the local net that wants traffic. They own their island net so they can block big corporate monopoly spam and government trash if they so desire, in favor of pro-community material.
I have not sampled it but it sounds like the way to go.
TJ
All utilities, services and communications that can be digitized WILL be. And you will not be permitted to bypass the "tiny tubes". This was all foreseen decades ago. It's like self-fulfilling prophecy. Too many people do not see it or are just not choosing to resist.
I think, the only thing the rest of us can do is keep trying to persuade them.
Contrary to the human-potentialist dreck spouted by the bourgeoisie, people are not "choosing" submission. Instead -- having been taught by Barack the Betrayer that hope is imbecility not audacity -- we increasingly recognize that we are utterly powerless.
What we the people need or want is irrelevant. The Internet will become whatever the capitalist aristocracy -- the Ruling Class -- wants to make it.
All the rest of us, no matter how loudly we protest, no longer have any part in this or any other vital decision.
The U.S. has become an oligarchy, with Christofascist theocracy at home and jackboot imperialism abroad; the American Experiment in constitutional democracy has failed; the American Dream is dead.
Neither will ever be resuscitated.
And until we wake up to that bitter truth -- until we realize the extent to which we have been disenfranchised -- our wretchedness will only intensify: the new country-club Internet is merely another example of government that serves only capitalists: absolute power and unlimited profit for the Ruling Class, total subjugation and genocidal poverty for everyone else.
But we have Facebook, and all our friends are there, and that's where all the party invitations are, and where we LIKE stuff, so we really don't have the time to think about these things. Oops, gotta go — someone just posted to my wall!