Issue of the week: Is net neutrality dead?

Google and Verizon purport to favor net neutrality, but their recent “declaration of principles” makes it clear that they have other ideas.

Hardball is coming to the Internet, said Rich Jaroslovsky in Bloomberg.com. Last week, Internet search giant Google and telecommunications provider Verizon published a joint “declaration of principles” laying out their vision for the future of the Web. The two giants offered “high-sounding language” about preserving what they called the “open Internet,” but it’s clear that what they really want is to kill “net neutrality.” That policy, which currently rules the digital road, dictates that Internet service providers “treat all information the same way, rather than cutting side deals to favor some bits over others.” Google CEO Eric Schmidt claims to support net neutrality, but like Verizon CEO Ivan Seidenberg, he sees the profit potential in providing extra-high-speed service to the highest bidders while relegating nonpaying customers to the horse-and-buggy lane. With Internet access tiered, 800-pound gorillas would thrive while little guys suffered. Google and Verizon are trying to carve out gigantic loopholes in net neutrality requirements for cable and DSL broadband, while eliminating them altogether for fast-growing wireless broadband.

Thank goodness for that, said Nick Schulz in AOLnews.com. The bureaucrats at the Federal Communications Commission interpret net neutrality as a mandate “purportedly to protect consumers from Internet companies bent on taking advantage of them.” Without net neutrality, this thinking goes, companies would charge high rates for downloading data-intensive files. But even if Google and Verizon really are plotting to gouge consumers, they won’t succeed in a marketplace where other heavyweights, including AT&T, Apple, and Microsoft, “are beating each other’s brains out” to win consumer loyalty. Besides, said Gordon Crovitz in The Wall Street Journal, we should differentiate among different forms of content. Consider the example of a woman implanted with a pacemaker that wirelessly alerts her doctor if she experiences cardiac arrhythmia. It’s perfectly reasonable to give that data high-speed priority over a video of “a squirrel on water skis.”

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up
To continue reading this article...
Continue reading this article and get limited website access each month.
Get unlimited website access, exclusive newsletters plus much more.
Cancel or pause at any time.
Already a subscriber to The Week?
Not sure which email you used for your subscription? Contact us