Net Neutrality Rules Does Not Prohibit Google / Verizon Agreement

By Author: autor
Total Articles: 4328
Comment this article

Now that the FCC has passed their rather skimpy net neutrality rules, the future looks more expensive for online companies. It’s only been a few hours since the FCC Order was passed and already reports confirming the worst fears of net neutrality proponents seem to be at play.

It seems that despite rattling their drums for fairness and neutrality, Google and Verizon are already talking about possibly taking advantage of the incredibly interpretive, loophole ridden rules. Rumors have surfaced in none other than the New York Times that Google is reaching an agreement with Verizon about allowing it to charge website owners higher fees for delivering content faster to users.

This is precisely what net neutrality proponents feared would happen if wireless internet service network providers, like Verizon, were not forced to follow the same rules as wired providers, which they were not.

In a move that many believe would give them an unfair advantage and lead to the development of two different kinds of internet environments, Verizon was quick to jump on the benefits of being a wireless provider.

What ...
... this means for end users is that you will have fast access to only the websites willing or able to pay the extra fees to Verizon if they are dependent on their coverage in a certain geographic area. In addition, Verizon would be able to push its own products to wireless users more than its competitorsâ€who would have to pay a premium for the same access speed.

This greatly impacts competition and innovation online. Some could even make the claim that it does precisely the opposite of what those against net neutrality rules for the wireless internet claimed they were protecting: the principles of the free market. If wireless providers can give preferential treatment to their own products and partners, and if innovators who are resource poor cannot pay their faster connection fees, then how is the strength of a company determined by the quality of their product?

In the internet age, how many seconds it takes to wait for a company’s site to load proportionally affects its bottom line profitability. To say otherwise is semantics.

We’ve heard time and time again: trust the market, consumers will decide who gains and who loses. But how is that possible in an unfair playing field where those who control access get to decide who gainsâ€not consumer preference?

In fact, the mechanics of the online market combined with the unlevel playing field on wireless internet will only serve to limit consumer choices by stifling start-ups, and as a consequence of continuously blocking competitors. How will the next ‘Google’ take off in this environment if it doesn’t have the same deep pockets to make its way to consumers? This rumor does not bode well for online companies spending lots of money on marketing and advertising to get a foothold against industry giants.

And, since the poor and minorities are disproportionally served by wireless service providers, will the cultural divide end up even larger as different online experiencesâ€which are as real and indelible as our non virtual livesâ€split down social lines and affect the culture? Will some people know about the next best way to find coupons or connect with their friends while others are stuck knowing about only the choices they are allowed on their wireless internet provider networks?

Google and Verizon have both currently issued statements denying any agreement between them and reaffirming their commitment to online neutrality, but it would not be the first time they are in hot water for allegedly throwing their heavy weight around to stifle competitors, especially in Google’s case.

If two different types of internet experiences develop as a result of the FCC Order as predicted, it will be accompanied by a sea change in the SEO and marketing strategies needed to compensate for a tougher marketplace for the majority of smaller online businesses.