On Nov. 10, President Barack Obama urged the Federal Communications Commission to consider reclassifying the Internet as a utility, in order to protect “net neutrality,” the concept that all Internet traffic should be treated equally. It will also allow the FCC to create stricter regulations concerning the web.
A show of support by the president for net neutrality is a step in the direction of allowing the Internet to remain as it is now: unfiltered and egalitarian.
Internet providers like Comcast have, contrary to the president, shown their support for Internet reform that would allow for companies to regulate how traffic is handled on their network.
The classification of the Web as a utility (under Title II) would turn cable companies, essentially, into utility companies.
This would prohibit these corporations from using their power as an Internet provider to favor certain types of traffic (namely, traffic from their services or paying companies) over other competitors’ web traffic.
The FCC is an independent agency, and therefore not subject to the
president’s wishes. But FCC chairman Tom Wheeler—the former telecom lobbyist appointed by president Obama–has said it would consider the president’s stance on the subject, along with the 4 million people that commented on the FCC’s page concerning net neutrality.But what exactly is net neutrality, and why should anyone care?
In short, the battle is about leaving the Internet the way it is, by treating all data in the same way rather than prioritizing certain types of data from certain places. And it’s a battle the consumer is on the verge of losing.
Internet providers won’t be going after the consumer with its tiered services (at first). It’ll target other companies, companies like Netflix, which has already been throttled by Comcast thanks to the amount of data it sends through the cable company’s network.
In the end, the two companies reached an agreement, and Netflix is paying Comcast for access to its network, and at the same time setting a dangerous precedent for how companies relying on the web interact with the Internet service providers.
Find out more about net neutrality and how it affects consumers and access on the next page …
Competition that cannot afford to be in the fast lane will be essentially priced out, leaving the playing field available only to incumbents or companies with major financial backing.
Craig Settles, Broadband industry analyst and host of the Gigabit Nation radio talk show, spoke to Black Enterprise about net neutrality and the ramifications of a tiered Internet decided by corporations. “If every website has to pay AT&T a toll, who’s going to benefit from that? Well the companies with money will benefit,” said Settles. “The folks without money will always be at a disadvantage. If it costs me money I may not be able to get online at all, or I may have to charge higher prices if I sell stuff, or any number of things that could happen.”
The business implications of a tiered Internet won’t just affect companies trying to
compete with a handicap. It’ll trickle down to consumers as well. If a company like Netflix has to pay Comcast for faster access, it will have to recoup that money somehow. And it’ll recoup its investment through higher prices for the consumer.Can’t afford the “fast lane†package? Then you’re stuck with speeds that are already being under-delivered by your Internet provider.
“It’s basically allowing AT&T to create a tiered payment structure for playing, and that’s what will screw people. And it will screw Black folks even more because of the economics,” said Settles. “AT&T charges more money for the fast lane, who’s gonna be able to pay AT&T more money? If I can afford to pay them the more money as a mid-size or smaller company then I have to turn around and figure out some way to charge either advertisers or people who surf the net to come to my site money. Because I have to recoup that money I’m paying AT&T. The impact is really felt among those with fewer resources, those with less money. ”
The effect of a tiered internet could find its way into actual communities as well. where more people are paying for priority access, more resources will be allocated, leaving those in poorer communities to deal with an aging system.
Don’t believe that money influences where cable companies exist? In some rural and poor communities, there is no Internet provider because it’s not cost-effective for companies to build out their infrastructure to those areas.
You will find more statistics at Statista
Prioritizing content is great for only one party: cable companies.
The rules have yet to be decided, however. The FCC will not make a decision until 2015 due to the complexity of the issue. If you want to let them know that an Internet not controlled by corporate interests is what you want, you can let them know on the FCC’s comments page. Chairman Wheeler says the organization will take these comments into consideration when making a decision.