The Federal Communications Commission officially voted Thursday to restore net neutrality, approving an order titled Safeguarding and Securing the Open Internet. This restores, with some changes and protections, rules passed in 2015 that allow the FCC to enforce basic broadband connectivity and equity rules.
Since the FCC announced in September that it would pursue this as a policy goal, it was more or less a fait accompli, since there was no real reason why the Commission, divided 3-2 in favor of the Democrats, would vote against it. So Thursday, while important, is just another milestone on the path forward.
The usual old hoaxes have been trotted out, just like 10 years ago: harsh regulation, tariff controls, stifling innovation: general arguments that never really had much weight. As Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel points out, the FCC already enforces rules with this authority (like Title II, for those of you who have been with us from the beginning) in other areas, and they are not overwhelmed by draconian rules and limits. .
Rather, it points out meaningless inconsistencies with the last few years of operation. For example, last year the FCC stripped some wireless service providers affiliated with Chinese state actors of their ability to operate in the US.
“But it’s important to understand that our actions did not extend to broadband, thanks to the work of the last FCC,” he said in remarks at the meeting. “Our national security authorities detail how state-affiliated Chinese operators and others have exploited insecure Internet routing protocols to hijack our Internet traffic. When we were asked to do something about it, thanks to the last FCC getting out of the broadband fight, the best we could offer was a forum in the Commission Meeting Room. “I don’t think that will deter our adversaries.”
However, it is not just a matter of the United States playing tricks with China. There are also internal issues they need to resolve: the FCC recently redefined broadband as 100 megabits up and 25 down. I received an email from Xfinity the morning the change went into effect, telling me that my speeds had magically updated at no cost to me. Generous, right? Of course, if the FCC hadn’t done that, it would have paid more and more for the lower speed it thought it could achieve.
FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel. Image credits: Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images
The same goes for zero rating, where an internet provider doesn’t count certain services, such as a streaming platform it owns or is partnered with, toward its bandwidth limit. If these aren’t nipped in the bud, you’ll end up with a lot of horrible packages between friendly corporations, and with a large proportion of TV now being streamed, that’s more important than ever in home broadband. What stands between you and a Cox Gigabit Plus exclusive on the next season of “Bridgerton”? The FCC, now.
Rosenworcel summed it up best: “I think in a modern digital economy we should have a national net neutrality policy and make it clear that the national communications expert has the ability to act when it comes to broadband.” That’s really all there is to it.
Wondering why it took so long? Republicans in the Senate for years blocked the nomination of a fifth commissioner, preventing the agency from doing any real work. When Anna Gómez was finally confirmed, the net neutrality proposal appeared within weeks.
Of course, as I recently noted, the new net neutrality rules are far from secure. They will have to overcome challenges in court and, depending on the outcome of the election, could simply be repealed or legislated. On the other hand, under a friendly administration, these rules could be enshrined in law during the next term.
Rosenworcel specifically mentioned the state of California’s own net neutrality rules as an example of what happens if federal authorities can’t be trusted. While she is clearly grateful for California’s legislative position, there may be issues to resolve where the two rules contradict each other. But establishing a national standard as a baseline for protections, as we do in so many other industries, seems like the bare minimum.
It will take some time before the rules go into effect, as they must first be published in the Federal Register and then there is another waiting period. But you probably won’t even notice when they do it. Companies that would have tried, and occasionally did, interfere with broadband traffic soon discovered it wasn’t worth the risk, due to consumer backlash and, eventually, federal protections. They have been more or less on their best behavior, knowing that this rule would probably come; Furthermore, it gave them the excuse to say: “anti-consumption practices, what anti-consumption practices? “We haven’t done something like this in years!” Do not believe them.
If you’re still curious about what the new rule refers to, there is a good informative page here (I learned things) and a video where the President breaks it down.
