Net neutrality was back in the news last week, when the Federal Communications Commission voted 3-2 to reinstate the classification of internet service as an essential telecommunications service. Okay, great. But what does that mean?
Generally, the theory behind net neutrality is that internet service providers (or ISPs: your Comcasts, Spectrums and the like) cannot throttle or assign "priority" to any services that are delivered via their broadband pipes. (The fact that ISPs choose to do price discrimination to certain communities, or to not service other communities at all, is bad, but that is a whole other set of problems.) Like other essential public utilities, such as water and electricity, the pipes have to provide equal access to all.
In this case, the government also plans to make the providers more accountable: ensuring fast speeds, quickly restoring outages, boosting network security and protecting consumer data. (And if you’ve started listening to Season Two of the podcast, you know I’m all about data protections.)
Of course, some companies would love to allow for paid priority to access. For example, an ISP could charge Netflix more so that their service isn’t degraded going into your house, or put Netflix in a bidding war against Disney+ to get access to your house. Zooming out just a bit to see how realistic this concern is, it means that Comcast, which owns NBC and Peacock, could charge everybody else except the services that they own
But we’re not talking about bougie access to streamers. As the pandemic made it clear, access to quality connections for consumers and businesses alike is vital for education, healthcare, commerce and more. It is essential infrastructure. Research shows that access reduces poverty and even boosts the health of underprivileged communities — research that clearly didn’t sway those in Congress who just last week let the Affordable Connectivity Program, which gave 23 million impoverished American households monthly vouchers for internet services, lapse after three years. But I digress.
Letting ISPs determine access and pricing without oversight could be a calamity, widening the privilege gap even further. (Or at least I think: The ruling’s opponents argue that these situations are all hypothetical, and that the FCC is using its power to expand its regulatory remit. The cable lobby is already promising “years of litigation” to block the ruling.)
Our bandwidth needs are always going up. Five years ago, we never would have imagined that we need as much as we do now. Imagine five years from now…
Utility or monopoly?
So why are we seeing these headlines? Back in 2015, under President Obama, internet service was classified as telecommunications, which the FCC has overseen since the 1930s, and therefore network neutrality was applied to it. (It’s also considered a utility, since it is a necessary service for daily activity.) Two years later, under Trump, the net neutrality rules were rolled back, with the argument that heavy-handed government oversight would decrease innovation and investment in the broadband space. (There was definitely resistance: Chairman Pai, who headed up the reversal, received death threats.)
But…. did anything really change in the last five years? Nothing too egregious happened. Knowing that they were being watched, ISPs were on pretty good behavior, though some were nabbed excluding some apps from data charges. And then there was the 2018 case that everyone in California likes to point to, when Verizon throttled (or slowed) the Santa Clara County’s wireless internet service during the wildfires. They claim it was a mistake, but, California being California, set its own statewide net neutrality rules that year. Unsurprisingly, lots of companies, and the Trump administration, sued to block this law from going into effect.
Biden nixed the lawsuit when he came into office, and appointed Jessica Roseworcel, a longtime advocate for open internet rules, chairwoman of the FCC. She’s the one behind the restoration of these rules. (Her comments on her reasoning behind this are an interesting read.)
Companies are worried that this is not the end, and that the FCC may wade into price-setting, among other things. But as Roseworcel pointed out, only one-fifth of the country has access to high-speed service, or can only get it from one provider. So if that provider messes around with “your ability to go where you want and do what you want online, you can’t just pick up and choose another provider,” she says. She calls the FCC a referee on the field looking out for the public interest, ensuring everyone’s access is “fast, open and fair.”
The internet has brought amazing power, opportunities and knowledge to millions of people. If you think about it, today, a small online startup is on the same playing field as the big ones. Netflix was originally built on the infrastructure of the mail service: It paid the same price as everyone else. The next generation internet service is being built right now, and we deserve to get access to it, without additional fees that stifle innovation. Remember the term “information superhighway”? If we allow providers to put up more tolls, we’re going to leave too many people behind.
Worth the Read
Do you use your face or thumb to unlock your phone? You might want to go back to a passcode after you read this update from Gizmodo: Your biometric data is not yet legally protected.
Mom, I’ve made the big time! Variety interviewed me about Season Two of the podcast. So fun!
Using data mining and AI, we can find new asteroids not by scanning the sky, but by looking at old photos already taken. The Asteroid Institute teamed up with Google Cloud and identified over 27,000 asteroids in just a few weeks.
We’ve looked at the many data problems surrounding today’s cars. (The Mozilla foundation found that they have the worst security and privacy grades of all products!) This new report shows how the state of California is moving to protect survivors of domestic abuse from being stalked in their own cars — what’s now known as tech-enabled violence.
California’s Delete Act, which helps consumers delete data gathered on them by brokers, updated its data broker registry to protect children, pregnant women, and people’s geolocation data. Once again, go California!
This week, Zinc Labs released guidelines around AI to help Democratic campaigns navigate (and avoid) the pitfalls. Rule no. 1: Always keep a human in the loop.