We should all be thanking our lucky stars that Trump, via his appointee to head the FCC, did away with so-called "net neutrality." We are seeing big benefits from that decision, as the Cato article below explains. Here's an excerpt:
Under net neutrality, which had been imposed by the FCC two years earlier, internet service providers were required to give equal treatment to all data traveling across their network, even if some data were especially burdensome. Economists argued that this dampened the financial incentive for ISPs to invest in their networks and contract with third‐party internet firms to provide additional resources. The FCC, under then‐new chairman Ajit Pai, accepted that reasoning and changed course.
The FCC took a lot of heat for that (and Pai’s children were even accosted). The decision took away people’s privacy rights. The telecom industry was the big winner and everyone else was the loser. The internet and innovation itself were being killed. Or so the critics said.
But then the new FCC decision went into effect in 2018 and … nothing bad happened.
Now, two years later, we’re benefiting from that policy change. In today’s Wall Street Journal, Penn law professor and telecom expert Christopher Yoo contrasts the effects of European internet regulation, which is akin to net neutrality, to U.S. regulation:
"The U.S. and EU have seen dramatically different investment and utilization. Between 2010 and 2016, American providers invested on average annually 2.35 times as much per household as their European counterparts. This allowed the average U.S. household to consume more than three times as much data as the average European household in 2017, according to Cisco. This is a significant jump over the 44% difference between U.S. and Europe that existed a decade ago. Emphasizing investments in infrastructure allows consumers to realize more of the benefits that the internet can provide."
Here's the link:
Under net neutrality, which had been imposed by the FCC two years earlier, internet service providers were required to give equal treatment to all data traveling across their network, even if some data were especially burdensome. Economists argued that this dampened the financial incentive for ISPs to invest in their networks and contract with third‐party internet firms to provide additional resources. The FCC, under then‐new chairman Ajit Pai, accepted that reasoning and changed course.
The FCC took a lot of heat for that (and Pai’s children were even accosted). The decision took away people’s privacy rights. The telecom industry was the big winner and everyone else was the loser. The internet and innovation itself were being killed. Or so the critics said.
But then the new FCC decision went into effect in 2018 and … nothing bad happened.
Now, two years later, we’re benefiting from that policy change. In today’s Wall Street Journal, Penn law professor and telecom expert Christopher Yoo contrasts the effects of European internet regulation, which is akin to net neutrality, to U.S. regulation:
"The U.S. and EU have seen dramatically different investment and utilization. Between 2010 and 2016, American providers invested on average annually 2.35 times as much per household as their European counterparts. This allowed the average U.S. household to consume more than three times as much data as the average European household in 2017, according to Cisco. This is a significant jump over the 44% difference between U.S. and Europe that existed a decade ago. Emphasizing investments in infrastructure allows consumers to realize more of the benefits that the internet can provide."
Here's the link:
Telecommuting to Avoid COVID-19? Thank the End of ‘Net Neutrality’
Americans who are sheltering because of COVID-19 can still use the internet to socialize, keep entertained, order groceries and other deliveries, and telecommute to earn a living and contribute to the economy, thanks to the end of net neutrality.
www.cato.org
