Why broadband execs are telling Washington and Wall Street different things on network neutrality

[Commentary] Broadband industry executives are telling Washington one thing about strict network neutrality while suggesting something else to Wall Street. The best explanation for the industry's seemingly divergent messages is that we're discussing two different constituencies.

Like many negotiations, much of Washington lobbying involves staking out the most aggressive position you can on an issue because you know you're leaving benefits on the table if you start out from a more moderate position. So it makes sense that the industry would seek to highlight a nightmare investment scenario in front of policymakers while telling actual investors something different. I'm not aware of any company that has expressly told the Federal Communications Commission that it would curtail its own investments; most have just spoken generally about the threat that strong net neutrality rules poses to the industry's future investment in network upgrades. But that, combined with the fact that companies must tell the truth to investors about their plans, combined with the fact that policy negotiations tend to encourage extreme rhetorical positions, suggests we can broadly believe what broadband companies are telling Wall Street about how they'd react to aggressive FCC oversight.