Net Neutrality: Profits and Principles

Sometimes it seems as if Congress has been debating net neutrality nearly as long as digital pundits have been saying next year is the year of mobile.

As someone not at all opposed to the making of money, I've been taking a look at both sides of this issue, and have come to some conclusions that I thought I would share.

The people against net neutrality, largely telcos, want a share of the enormous amount of money being made through digital marketing. Can you imagine how it chaps the butts at ATT to see Google's stock price where it is? Many hardware companies also oppose net neutrality, thinking they'll get more butter for their bread from richer telcos.

I imagine the telco board meetings with a circle of Elmer Fudds wondering where their Hossenpfeffer is.

OK, and over on the other side, the popular POV is that there are earnest free speech advocates in holey sweaters toiling away on a principle. And there are. But let's get real. The real money behind net neutrality comes form giant publishers like Amazon who have all the Hossenpfeffer, thank you very much, and don't want to share.

So it's money versus money.

There are other issues -- telcos state that more profit will be essential to refurbing the Internet infrastructure in the coming years. If you think about how much MORE bandwidth each of us are using, the argument seems to hold some water.

Certainly, US competitiveness requires a robust Internet. But it's also important that we take a larger view of what creates US success online -- and that is an incredibly robust and inventive environment where big ideas can succeed despite small budgets.

Cool stuff mostly comes from little start-ups, not big corporations. Do you think for a moment that if the economics of the auto industry were different that there wouldn't be niches of ecofriendly cars? But because the economics favor large companies, startups in that market are all but nonexistent.

The same would be true, I fear, on a two tier Internet. Since innovations are going to increasingly rely on big bandwidth demands, we need to preserve a level playing field for the

sake of our competitiveness.

And let's not forget the idea of free speech and the essential role that the web is providing on that score, in an era where five or so media companies control all of the MSM.

What's the solution? I say it's neutrality. Issues with bandwidth demands could be addressed by allowing end users opt to pay for faster connections -- focusing on value for usage rather than pay for access.

Look, there are billions of words online on this topic, I just thought I'd add a few hundred more because it is an important issue and our ability to innovate is at stake.

Thanks for reading, and don't forget to fight.