Net Neutrality: The Pipes vs The Swipes

I’ll bet if you ask anyone on Facebook or Instagram what is Net Neutrality they would not have a clue. I am not sure I understand it fully but given the recent court opinion that invalidated the law that created it. It might be worth a look.

The best way I can explain it, Net Neutrality is a law that states an ISP an Internet Service Provider must provide service on the same basis to all customers.

It is loosely based on a concept that came into being during the early days of telephony. The idea that some utilities are so necessary for public well-being that they must be provided equally to all. This mandated that utilities such as gas and electric and telephone access were restricted from certain practices that might deter or prevent citizen access to these services.

The New Deal funded the Rural Electrification Cooperative. It financed network build out of electrical services to remote rural areas. There was for many years a surcharge on telephone bills called the universal service charge. These funds were used to build out telephone network access and upgrade service capabilities to areas that could not justify the expense to a private sector company.

So Along Comes the Internet!

So along comes the internet. Internet Service Providers (The Pipes) were classified as a utility and restricted from premium pricing and other practices that would restrict access to the internet. Content Providers (The Swipes) used this universal access to create large networks.  Small companies with big ideas became adominant social force. They offer free access to content to customers and then resell that customer’s attention to advertisers.  Almost without noticing internet users became productized. Their click and six seconds of attention bundled with data that they provide free of charge is sold to the highest bidder. They/We are paid nothing.

The internet that we thought would be a medium for constructive social change became a small group of billion-dollar behemoths that figured out how to trigger our baser instincts and make us look. So we get Crime in the Subway and Marjorie Taylor Greene. Not The High Line and Stenny Hoyer. (Look it Up) In so doing they have created a social patina of cynicism and disbelief.

You Mean It Doesn’t Have to Be True?

This is confounded by Section 230 of the 1996 Communications Decency Act. Unlike Newspapers or individual content creators if you run a site where others post you are immune from lawsuits. The idea reflected a warped idea of freedom of speech. It turns out that the result is huge platforms that do as little moderation as possible and oversight as possible. If you use an algorithm to decide what your viewers see, you are a publishing company. You should have some responsibility for what you publish.

It is difficult to understand how much Net Neutrality has contributed to this situation. It feels like we need a complete reevaluation of the terms and conditions for both the pipes and the swipes.

A quote that has been attributed to Twain, Churchill, Jefferson and others is an example of one of those untruths that can gain authenticity in the swirling wind of internetia. It is the ultimate irony. Whoever said it.  “A lie can be halfway round the world while the truth is still getting its trousers on.” Today that lie can get fully dressed have a full day to itself and be back in its pajamas by the time the truth brushes it’s teeth.