Just a few minutes ago, I sent in a comment to the FCC about the whole net neutrality thing going on. The deadline for sending in comments is approaching, so if you want to give feedback, go do so. After you do (so as I don’t influence your feedback), continue reading.
I’m going to start from the most abstract to the most specific, and my argument is rather simple, but feel free to disagree at any point.
To start off, there are certain things that the economic force of the “average” consumer cannot change in any direct or foreseeable manner. Take, for example, the mobile phone market. I heard an interview on NPR a few months ago where the man being interviewed, some spokesguy for some mobile conglomerate thingamabob, explained that if consumers really wanted a different situation in the mobile phone arena, they would clamor for it. That’s right, ladies and gentlemen, the reason that owning a cell phone and paying for service sucks ass is because you haven’t done anything.
Around that same time, I read an interesting post (somewhere – if anybody knows what I’m referring to, please fill me in) about how to tell if you are an evil corporation. The article listed the three main factors of running an evil corporation. My memory is a bit hazy, but they were along the lines of:
- In order to keep customers, you make them sign extensive contracts with huge penalties for breaking (in other words, no real customer loyalty).
- You create rules for your customers in hopes that they break them and then you can charge them for the infractions (hidden costs/fees)
- You intentionally mislead customers about your rules in order to push them towards the extra fees
The first two are the important ones, and they do strike at the heart of the situation. In the ideal capitalist economy, companies fight with each other for the business of the consumer, forced by said competition to win customer loyalty and provide goods/services at an agreeable price point.
Now, in the cell phone market, you are really paying about the same thing for any carrier. You may save a few bucks here or there, or find a special at a different carrier (provided, of course, that your contract has run out), but you are going to pay the same thing anywhere. (On a somewhat unrelated note, the ability to now take your number with you is really an empty victory – you now have the right to keep your number as you switch from one crappy carrier to another).
Anyways, I think this situation can happen in a few circumstances, most notably when the corporations have some type of oligopoly in that area of the market. In cell phones, the medium of communication is the oligopoly. In net neutrality, its the same thing: the pipes. One of the other defining characteristics of the net neutrality situation is that there are really two consumers of the interwebs: joe citizen and big pappa corporation – in this case, the only real market force is held by the big pappa.
Here is the meat and potatoes – without FCC regulations, broadband carriers will be free to begin abusing the content delivery system. In my comment to the FCC, I wrote that this is very much akin to toll road owners setting different speed limits and quality of road conditions for different makes of automobiles (think: 4 different lanes, depending on the type of car you drive). The common argument of the market fixing itself, along the lines of, “Well, the consumer has choice of broadband carrier, and can just go somewhere else!” holds in all three of the examples discussed up to this point. Sure, you can go around the highway, but it will probably slow you down, or it may make it literally impossible. Sure, you can switch to a different cell phone carrier, but they really all participate in the same things. Sure, those of us with a choice of two different ISPs could switch, but that might mean switching to a different type of service, and some people have no choice at all.
Anyways, I don’t think we can trust the market to help us on this one. Ironically, the only reason that we have this oligopoly in the first place is because of earlier government-made monopoly, but I still think the only way to keep things fair is for the FCC to step in. The invisible hand really doesn’t hold in all situations, and it does not begin to hold in this one.