Hijacking net neutrality

[Commentary] Quick, what do Amazon, Netflix, Microsoft, Yahoo, Cogent, Level 3, Google, Facebook and Vonnage all have in common? Among other things, they all pump a lot of data onto last-mile broadband networks and they could all afford to pay for a fast lane, if necessary.

Well, allowing discriminatory network management would be a grave threat to Netflix’s and Google’s bottom lines in any case. For all the hue and cry over the prospect of fast lanes on the Internet for the few and “dirt roads” for the rest, the truth is, no one wants to pay for a fast lane, even if they are able to. It’s bad for business. Regardless of what happens with the vote, however, it’s really the whole net neutrality debate that’s gone off the rails.

As evident from the Netflix, et. al. letter, the debate has devolved into an argument between the big and the bigger over the price of throughput. And Chairman Wheeler has allowed the FCC to get trapped into refereeing among the vested commercial interests rather than promoting and protecting the public interest (more or less the definition of regulatory capture).

It’s hard to see what the public interest is in the rate that Amazon or Netflix is able to negotiate with Comcast for a fast lane. I’ve been skeptical that reclassification is the way to go because it could provoke such a monumental political fight that anything useful happening on the net neutrality front could be delayed for years. But if the only alternative is to limit the public’s interest in the most important communications network of our time to refereeing between Netflix and Comcast, perhaps it’s time to take on the fight.

[Sweeting is Principal, Concurrent Media Strategies]