Net neutrality is dead — welcome to the age of ‘pay-to-play’ and premium access
Amid the rapid elimination of government oversight by Trump administration, a pivotal turning point in the equitable access to internet bandwidth has been overlooked.
On Jan. 2, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals dealt a decisive blow to net neutrality, overturning the Federal Communications Commission's 2024 rules. After facing constant challenges and reversals since its original adoption in 2015, this regulatory seesaw has effectively ended.
This ruling is striking, but not surprising. The Sixth Circuit had suspended net neutrality rules last summer, signaling skepticism of the FCC's authority to issue them. At the time, the judges wrote, “Absent a clear mandate to treat broadband as a common carrier, we cannot assume that Congress granted the Commission this sweeping power.”
Brendan Carr, the newly appointed FCC chair under President Trump, has frequently spoken out against net neutrality rules. Carr has argued that during the period between 2017 and 2023, when net neutrality rules had been struck down, internet speeds increased and coverage expanded. Carr and others have also pointed out that such regulations can stifle innovation and hamper expansion of broadband into rural areas. He views net neutrality rules as “micromanagement by government bureaucrats.”
Carr makes valid and important points, but net neutrality is widely popular among the public. A 2022 survey conducted by the University of Maryland found that 73 percent of Americans supported it, including majorities of both political parties. Even the web’s inventor, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, has been steadfast in his support for fair and equal access. Is it possible to serve both perspectives?
Neither Republicans nor Democrats want a future where Big Tech monopolies like Meta and Google pay to dominate available bandwidth. In such a scenario, the free market would grind to a halt, as smaller competitors are priced out. In a curious twist, Big Tech companies publicly back net neutrality; they position their support as altruism, while also about keeping the antitrust bullseye off their backs and saving money by avoiding extra fees for fast lanes.
The concept of prioritized internet lanes isn’t hypothetical. As recently as 2023, major networks including T-Mobile, AT&T and Verizon began testing preferential treatment in their 5G networks, using technology to give certain applications a faster path to users. Through a capability called “network slicing,” they designate portions of their wireless spectrum as premium lanes for services including video streaming, gaming and virtual meetings.
Trump opposed net neutrality during his first term. Notably, this was prior to his founding of Truth Social. Interestingly, principles of neutrality have played a strong role in the level playing field for his platform.
Entities like Truth Social, Bluesky, Mastodon and others provide access to their apps with the same bandwidth as the giants. Where they naturally compete is on features, design and unique user-experiences. That's where the competitiveness is.
Here's one analogy: All cars run on energy — gas or electricity (or a combo) — that is priced the same for everyone. The car itself is what varies. Consumers can pay for different engineering, luxuries and more features. But the energy that powers them is the same.
Expanding the analogy, everyone benefits from free public highways, whether you drive a Rolls Royce or a Honda Civic. At the same time, drivers can choose to pay a premium for special express lanes and private highways. The existence of these avenues doesn’t inherently diminish the experiences of drivers who don’t use them.
A similar framework can be established for the web. A good solution is a two-fold balancing act, legislated to support free market capitalism as well as established players' “ability to pay.” This is the most important point. Unregulated pay-to-play broadband caters to deep-pocketed monopolies, while seed-funded startups won't see the light of day.
For capitalism to flourish (versus monopolism), it is essential there be a free, high-quality standard of broadband. This is the online interstate highway for everyone. In tandem, ISPs can create premium “fast lanes” for sites and apps with the wherewithal to pay additional fees. This compromise serves both sides, and can be delivered through Congress via bipartisan legislation.
Net neutrality in and of itself isn’t going away. States are free to set their own guidelines. Several already have, including California, Colorado, Oregon, Vermont and New York. All have passed their own neutrality rules, and the federal ruling may inspire other states to legislate.
In summary, the fix is to establish a new standard of broadband access that critically supports new competition and the free market, while respecting the independence and freedom of ISPs to create premium options for those with deeper pockets. Everyone wins.
Mark Weinstein is a tech thought leader, privacy expert, and one of the inventors of social networking. He is the author of “Restoring Our Sanity Online: A Revolutionary Social Framework.”
Source link
