Why the Massive Cable Merger Might Be Good for Net Neutrality

Allowing Comcast to buy Time Warner could mean less online discrimination.

National Journal
Brendan Sasso
Add to Briefcase
See more stories about...
Brendan Sasso
Feb. 13, 2014, 9:02 a.m.

Con­sumer ad­vocacy groups are already mount­ing their cam­paign to try to kill Com­cast’s $45 bil­lion bid to buy Time Warner Cable. But the deal might ac­tu­ally be good for one of con­sumer ad­voc­ates’ top causes: net neut­ral­ity.

The D.C. Cir­cuit Court of Ap­peals struck down the Fed­er­al Com­mu­nic­a­tions Com­mis­sion’s net-neut­ral­ity rules last month. The rules, form­ally called the Open In­ter­net Or­der, re­quired In­ter­net ser­vice pro­viders to treat all web­sites equally. Lib­er­als and con­sumer ad­voc­ates fear that with the rules gone, In­ter­net pro­viders could start slow­ing down ac­cess to sites like Google and Net­flix un­less the sites pay for spe­cial In­ter­net “fast lanes.” The pro­viders could even block ac­cess to par­tic­u­lar sites al­to­geth­er.

But even with the rules thrown out, there is one ma­jor broad­band pro­vider that won’t be able to dis­crim­in­ate against In­ter­net traffic any­time soon: Com­cast. To re­ceive ap­prov­al from the FCC three years ago to buy NBC-Uni­ver­sal, Com­cast agreed to a slew of con­di­tions, in­clud­ing prom­ising to abide by the agency’s net-neut­ral­ity rules un­til at least 2018 no mat­ter what happened in the courts.

Com­cast said Thursday that it will ex­tend that com­mit­ment to all Time Warner Cable sub­scribers if the mer­ger is ap­proved.

So while the fed­er­al courts have said the FCC over­stepped its leg­al au­thor­ity with the net-neut­ral­ity rules, about 30 mil­lion U.S. house­holds would still be pro­tec­ted from on­line dis­crim­in­a­tion if Com­cast and Time Warner are al­lowed to merge.

“Those In­ter­net con­di­tions would ap­ply Day One,” Com­cast CEO Bri­an Roberts said on a con­fer­ence call with re­port­ers. “I think it’s un­ar­gu­able that’s bet­ter than where the court just va­cated that rule for every oth­er” In­ter­net ser­vice pro­vider.

The deal would also be an op­por­tun­ity for the FCC to force the com­pan­ies to ac­cept new agree­ments, such as ex­tend­ing the net-neut­ral­ity com­mit­ment well bey­ond 2018.

Dav­id L. Co­hen, Com­cast’s ex­ec­ut­ive vice pres­id­ent, sug­ges­ted that the com­pany is open to ne­go­ti­at­ing ad­di­tion­al con­di­tions, in­clud­ing the length of the net-neut­ral­ity com­mit­ment. He ad­ded that Com­cast sup­ports the net-neut­ral­ity reg­u­la­tions and plans to work with the FCC to re­write the rules in a way that can sur­vive court chal­lenges.

“Well be­fore 2018, I think the FCC is go­ing to have a new re­gime in place to provide the same level of con­sumer pro­tec­tion and con­sumer be­ne­fit that the ori­gin­al Open In­ter­net Or­der provided,” he said.

But con­sumer ad­voc­ates ar­gued that net-neut­ral­ity con­di­tions won’t be enough to out­weigh the com­pet­it­ive harm of the deal.

“I think net-neut­ral­ity rules are im­port­ant, which is why they should be in­dustry-wide and shouldn’t ex­pire after a few years,” said John Bergmay­er, a seni­or staff at­tor­ney for Pub­lic Know­ledge. “I think even say­ing that these con­di­tions would be ‘bet­ter than noth­ing’ sig­ni­fic­antly over­sells the case.”

Matt Wood, policy dir­ect­or for Free Press, said the FCC should en­act tough net-neut­ral­ity reg­u­la­tions, not try to ne­go­ti­ate for a tem­por­ary com­mit­ment from one com­pany.

“We don’t need a few more years of ap­ply­ing the old rules to a big com­pany or two — es­pe­cially not in re­turn for a near-na­tion­wide cable TV and ISP mono­poly,” he said.

What We're Following See More »
60 VOTES NEEDED
Kaine and Warner Oppose CR
1 hours ago
THE LATEST
6 YEAR EXTENSION, NOT 30 DAYS
Cornyn Corrects Trump on CHIP
1 hours ago
THE LATEST
PRO-TRUMP SPENDING COULD VIOLATE FECA
FBI Investigating Potential Russian Donations to NRA
2 hours ago
THE DETAILS

"The FBI is investigating whether a top Russian banker with ties to the Kremlin illegally funneled money to the National Rifle Association to help Donald Trump win the presidency." Investigators have focused on Alexander Torshin, the deputy governor of Russia’s central bank "who is known for his close relationships with both Russian President Vladimir Putin and the NRA." The solicitation or use of foreign funds is illegal in U.S. elections under the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) by either lobbying groups or political campaigns. The NRA reported spending a record $55 million on the 2016 elections.

Source:
VIOLATORS WOULD BE IDENTIFIED
Members Will Now Have to Pay Misconduct Settlements
2 hours ago
THE LATEST

"Senior House negotiators are set to unveil as soon as Thursday a bipartisan plan to shake up Capitol Hill’s workplace harassment system — and to force lawmakers found liable for misconduct to pay settlements with their own money. ... The Hill's Office of Compliance, which adjudicates workplace harassment claims, would release a report every six months on misconduct settlements, including the identities of the offices involved."

Source:
UNDERMINES ALLIES ON CHIP, WALL
Trump Tweets Complicate Shutdown Talks
2 hours ago
THE LATEST

"President Donald Trump on Thursday undermined efforts by House Republican leaders and his own staff to avoid a government shutdown, criticizing a decision to include an extension of the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP) in a GOP-crafted stopgap spending bill." He said the CHIP fix “should be part of a long term solution, not a 30 Day, or short term, extension!” Earlier this morning, he contradicted Chief of Staff John Kelly, saying that his views on the Mexican border wall have not "evolved," and he still expects Mexico to pay for it.

Source:
×
×

Welcome to National Journal!

You are currently accessing National Journal from IP access. Please login to access this feature. If you have any questions, please contact your Dedicated Advisor.

Login