Groups advocating Internet regulation legislation worry that providers of Internet access will somehow discriminate in a way that favors some Web sites or Internet content providers over another, says Mike Altschul, CTIA senior vice president and general counsel. “Their concern is that some Web sites might perform better or be blocked by some service providers, even though there’s absolutely no evidence that any of this would happen or that consumers would accept it. Even those who are arguing that they need net neutrality legislation admit that it’s a hypothetical concern.”
Consumers today have multiple choices for broadband connection: cable, DSL, satellite, wireless and even connections over electric lines in some areas. “We believe that there are so many competitive providers of Internet access and that customers are so powerful in insisting that service providers take care of their needs that this concern over net neutrality is hypothetical and will never become real,” Altschul says.
“It’s become a symbolic issue,” says McCurry. “The Internet has become a critical tool for many organizations to advance their causes, and the concern is that anything that takes away their ability to use that political tool is a threat. They believe that big bad businesses are going to be controlling networks for their own political interests.
“The counter argument is that’s why you need robust competition,” McCurry continues. “Anytime that anyone has tried to diminish content on the Internet for political reasons, there’s immediately a firestorm. Customers won’t stand for it. It would be foolhardy for a company to use their market power to disadvantage any one side of a political debate because that would immediately anger another part of their consumer base.”
The competitive wireless marketplace is a good example of how that works. Customers may choose between several service providers and the carriers, who want to keep their customers and attract more, respond by offering different deals and services they believe will be most popular with consumers. The demand for and use of wireless broadband growing is quickly, so why would any wireless carrier (or any Internet access provider) limit or slow access to Web sites, knowing that customers have several options when it comes to selecting a service provider?
“We don’t see any incentive here to discriminate,” notes Larry Spiwak, president of the Phoenix Center for Advanced Legal and Economic Public Policy Studies.
“Even if you were a monopolist you’d have no incentive, because you want people to use your product. If they can’t visit Web sites, they’re not going to use it. That’s an important point.”
The Internet has become a critical tool for many organizations to advance their causes, and the concern is that anything that takes away their ability to use that political tool is a threat. They believe that big bad businesses are going to be controlling networks for their own political interests.“
Mike McCurry
Public Strategies Group
