The constant refrain of the Astroturf groups like Mike McCurry’s “Hands Off the Internet” is that Network Neutrality is a solution in search of a problem:

“We have no clear evidence that content is being discriminated against and we have no real problem with quality of service that cannot be addressed under current law. We think the advocates of regulated net neutrality have not pointed to a problem that needs a solution.”

– Mike McCurry, Wall Street Journal, May 24

The Truth: Telco-funded lobbyists like McCurry frequently cite the absence of numerous examples of blocking or degradation to back their argument. This is a red herring.

There are multiple real-world instances of blocking and impairment. But there are good reasons why we haven’t yet witnessed a full-blown epidemic. Until very recently Net Neutrality has been the operating principle of the Internet — when telco front groups like “Hands Off” repeat that rhetoric, they merely reinforce our point.

All this changed last year. In August 2005, the FCC put the largest phone companies under a year-long moratorium that prohibits them from violating Net Neutrality. This FCC ruling will lift at the end of this summer. Without Congress taking action to make Net Neutrality the law, the path will open for rampant discrimination.

Until then — and because we are in the midst of a hotly contested legislative debate — companies like AT&T and Verizon are trying to be on their best behavior. This would soon change without Net Neutrality.

By far the most significant evidence regarding the network owners’ plans to discriminate is their stated intent to do so:

• William Smith of BellSouth: “[Smith] told reporters and analysts that an Internet service provider such as his firm should be able, for example, to charge Yahoo Inc. for the opportunity to have its search site load faster than that of Google Inc. Or, Smith said, his company should be allowed to charge a rival voice-over-Internet firm so that its service can operate with the same quality as BellSouth’s offering.” (Washington Post, December 1)
• Edward Whitacre of AT&T: “Now what they would like to do is use my pipes free, but I ain’t going to let them do that because we have spent this capital and we have to have a return on it. So there’s going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they’re using. Why should they be allowed to use my pipes?” (Business Week, November 7)

Network Neutrality advocates are not imagining a doomsday scenario. We are taking the telecom execs at their word.

To learn more, read the “Facts and Fictions” report by Free Press, Consumers Union and Consumer Federation of America. Or visit the other Lies of the Week:

Big Lie of the Week: No. 2

Big Lie of the Week: No. 1

This entry was posted on Friday, June 2nd, 2006 at 4:00 am and is filed under Uncategorized.-->