By Rebecca Vesely
What is net neutrality?
Net neutrality bars internet service providers (ISPs) from blocking, slowing or prioritizing web traffic in any way. In 2015, the Federal Communications Commission under the Obama administration reclassified ISPs and subjected them to new rules requiring net neutrality. Net neutrality is also sometimes called the free and open Internet.
Why is net neutrality so popular?
Net neutrality enjoys broad public support. Eighty-three percent of Americans – including three out of four Republicans – opposed ending net neutrality. Net neutrality ensures a level playing field for all who are online, large or small, allowing anyone to compete for user attention.
What did the FCC just do to net neutrality?
In a 3-2 vote along party lines, the Federal Communications Commission on Dec. 14, 2017, adopted the Proposal to Restore Internet Freedom. The vote repealed 2015 rules that classified ISPs as telecommunications companies, which subjected them to rules governing utilities. You can read more about the regulatory backstory at this Vox explainer by Aja Romano.
The December FCC vote allows ISPs to speed up, slow down or prioritize services for apps and websites, and charge customers for “fast lane“ access to content they seek. The decision also reduced the FCC’s role in overseeing telecom companies.
FCC Chairman Ajit Pai said in his comments prior to the December vote that the move was “not going to kill democracy,“ and would instead reduce regulatory burdens on ISPs thereby “helping consumers and promoting competition.” He said that the 2015 rules on net neutrality discouraged broadband infrastructure spending, which fell from $78.4 billion in 2014 to $76 billion in 2016.
How could this affect health care and/or the media?
Allowing ISPs to create fast and slow lanes and charge different rates for access could acerbate health disparities, slow adoption of telehealth and further diminish the resources and audience for local news.
Mei Wa Kwong of the Centered for Connected Health Policy wrote in a blog post that the FCC’s policy change could price out some patients and providers from telehealth and remote patient monitoring systems, especially in rural areas.
And a December 2017 report from Stanford University’s Center for Internet and Society concluded that ending net neutrality would hurt local news organizations. If local news organizations are forced into internet slow-lanes, potential readers will turn to other sources of news from deep-pocketed content giants such as Facebook, thus diminishing local news ad revenues even further:
The cost of online news reporting will go up, and local providers’ ability to offer quality content will go down. There will be fewer legacy outlets, and many of the ones that survive will do so by consolidating, diminishing their independence and the diversity of the local news ecosystem as a whole. And it will be harder than ever for local news startups to fill the space, because the costs of starting an online business will be higher, and the ability to innovate technologically will be constrained.
What happens next?
Court challenges are certain. Within hours of the FCC vote New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said he would lead a multi-state lawsuit against the “illegal rollback.” Congress could also act to preserve net neutrality. The Congressional Review Act allows Congress to undo recent regulations, as it has done to unravel Obama-era regulations since President Trump took office. Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) announced he would introduce a resolution to undo the FCC action. Some states, including California, are considering legislation to protect net neutrality under their jurisdictions.
FCC Commissioner Mignon Clyburn, a Democrat who voted against gutting net neutrality, said in her remarks: “The fight to save net neutrality does not end today. The agency does not have the final word. Thank goodness for that.”
Further resources:
