The Federal Communications Commission has voted to restore net neutrality, which prevents broadband providers from slowing down or blocking internet traffic to certain sites and gives improved access to others that pay additional fees. The new order, titled Safeguarding and Securing the Open Internet, includes some changes and protections. This decision brings back rules that were originally put in place during the Obama administration in 2015 and were reversed in 2017 after Donald Trump became president.
After the FCC declared in September that it would be making this a policy objective, it was expected that it would happen; with a 3-2 split in favor of the Democrats, there was little reason for the Commission to oppose it. Therefore, while significant, Thursday’s announcement is simply another step towards progress.
Critics of the decision brought up familiar arguments from a decade ago: they claim that net neutrality leads to excessive regulations, control over rates, and stifles innovation. However, Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel argues that the FCC already enforces rules in other areas using similar authority (such as Title II) without imposing overly strict regulations and restrictions.
Instead, she highlights illogical contradictions that have occurred in the past few years. For example, the FCC revoked the operating privileges of certain wireless providers linked to Chinese state actors last year, but broadband providers were not affected due to previous work done by the previous FCC. This was stated during a meeting on Thursday.
Rosenworcel mentioned that our national security agencies have reported instances of Chinese carriers and other state-affiliated entities using insecure internet routing protocols to manipulate our internet traffic. Despite being asked to address this issue, the previous FCC administration did not take action, only offering a meeting room forum as a response. This lack of action may not be enough to discourage our adversaries.
Not only is the U.S. engaging in secretive actions with China, but there are also domestic issues that need to be addressed. The FCC recently changed the definition of broadband to 100 megabits up and 25 down. I received an email from Xfinity on the day this change took effect, informing me that my internet speeds had been increased at no extra charge. It seems like a generous gesture, but if the FCC hadn’t intervened, I would have likely been forced to pay more for slower internet speeds.
The image shows Jessica Rosenworcel, who is the Chairwoman of the FCC. The credit for the image goes to Chip Somodevilla of Getty Images.
The image of FCC Chairwoman Jessica Rosenworcel is credited to Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images.
Similar to zero rating, zero-rating is when an internet service provider does not include certain services, such as a streaming platform they own or have a partnership with, in your data usage limit. If these practices are not stopped early, it could result in unfair partnerships between big companies – especially as more people are watching TV through streaming services on their home internet. The FCC is the only thing preventing exclusive deals like Cox Gigabit Plus being the only way to watch popular shows like “Bridgerton.”
Rosenworcel stated that in today’s digital economy, it is important to have a national policy on net neutrality to ensure that the nation’s communications expert has the authority to regulate broadband when necessary. This is the key point to take away from the discussion.
Curious about the delay? The nomination of a fifth Commissioner was held up by Senate Republicans for years, hindering the agency’s ability to make any significant progress. Once Anna Gomez was confirmed, the net neutrality proposal was quickly introduced.
As I mentioned before, the new rules regarding net neutrality are not guaranteed to remain in place. They may face legal challenges and could potentially be repealed or changed depending on the election results. However, if a supportive administration is in office, these rules could become permanent in the near future.
The concept of net neutrality is unlikely to be upheld during a Trump administration.
Rosenworcel praised California’s state net neutrality rules as a prime example of the need for federal regulation. While she appreciates California’s efforts, there may be conflicts between state and federal rules that need to be addressed. Implementing a national rule to provide a consistent level of protection, as is done in other industries, should be considered essential.
It will take some time for the rules to become active, as they need to be published in the Federal Register first and then there is a waiting period. However, you probably won’t even notice when they do. Companies that tried to interfere with broadband traffic realized it wasn’t worth the risk due to backlash from consumers and eventual federal protections. They have been behaving well, anticipating the implementation of this rule. This also gave them the opportunity to deny any anti-consumer practices by claiming they haven’t engaged in such behavior for years. Don’t trust their claims.
If you’re still interested in learning more about the new rule, there is an informative page available that provides useful information, as well as a video in which Chairwoman Rosenworcel explains it in detail.