A dangerous tech policy narrative emerges: Decreasing choice to increase freedom

[Commentary] More and more, tech policy ideas embrace obvious contradictions and lean on manufactured numbers masquerading as data that, in reality, would not deserve a passing grade in elementary school math. The result is that they hurt the very people they claim to want to help:

• Prohibiting fast lanes on the Internet hurts small content providers who need economical ways to differentiate themselves from the likes of Google. Differentiation is key to success in tech markets.
• Prohibitions on sponsored data, also known as zero rating, make broadband services less affordable for the poor.
• FCC Chairman Wheeler justified new regulations of set-top boxes (STBs) by quoting (without attribution) a “study” claiming that the devices have increased in price by 185% since 1994. That result is at best an apples to oranges comparison of 1994 STBs that only descrambled channels to 2015 STBs that record, handle high-definition content, and support two-way interactivity, among other features.
• The FCC redefined broadband, choosing a speed that only a limited number customers are buying and then claiming market failure.

Why is this happening? It appears to be a combination of rent seeking — where a business, bureaucracy or politician seeks regulations that give them a bigger slice of the economic pie without enlarging the pie itself — and a view of tech policy that conflates control with freedom.

[Jamison is the director and Gunter Professor of the Public Utility Research Center at the University of Florida]