The concept of “net neutrality”— that internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all data on the internet equally — fails to acknowledge the realities of network management and the benefits of a free-market approach to internet services. Despite the claims made in the original net neutrality order, no significant instances of blocking, throttling, or paid prioritization have harmed consumers or stifled innovation. 

The true agenda behind another push for net neutrality is to bring all networks under public utility regulations, effectively putting appointed government staff in charge of managing and arbitrating internet services. This approach would stifle innovation, reduce investment in network infrastructure, and limit the ability of internet service providers to respond quickly to changing market demands and technological advancements. Companies make decisions driven by consumer demand and financial interests in a competitive market that encourages investment in network infrastructure, innovation, and the creation of new services, leading to greater consumer choice, reduced prices, and improved quality of service as providers vie for customer loyalty.

During COVID, we learned how valuable Internet connectivity is to our society. We agree as a society that consumers should have access to a free, open, and secure Internet that fosters innovation, competition, and the unrestricted exchange of ideas and information. There is little disagreement that internet service providers should offer transparent, concise information about their services, including speed, cost, and traffic management practices, empowering consumers to make informed choices.

But let’s return to those three misunderstandings: blocking, throttling, and paid prioritization. Blocking and throttling network traffic are essential cybersecurity tools for network administrators of Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to manage malware and illegitimate traffic on their networks. These practices help ensure the safety and security of internet users by preventing the spread of malware, spam, and other malicious content. Without the ability to block or throttle specific types of traffic, networks, and consumers are more vulnerable to attacks and could experience significant performance issues. Standard network hygiene practices ensure the safety and security of internet users by preventing problems before they reach consumers, like blocking ports commonly used to launch malicious attacks, steal customer information, or send spam.

Here are examples of nefarious activities prevented by ISP blocking and throttling network practices to maintain a healthy network ecosystem:

•  The spread of malware: Networks block traffic from known malicious sources, stopping the spread of viruses, ransomware, and other attacks designed to steal data or compromise systems.

•  Denial-of-service (DoS) attacks: Throttling mitigates the effects of DoS attacks, where bad actors attempt to overwhelm a network with traffic, making it unavailable to legitimate users.

•  Spam and phishing campaigns: Blocking emails and websites associated with spam and phishing protects users from falling victim to fraud and identity theft.

Without the ability to block or throttle specific types of traffic, networks would be more vulnerable to attacks and could experience significant performance issues.

Paid prioritization is another concern raised by net neutrality advocates that is misunderstood.  Businesses and organizations that require dedicated, high-speed connections have long been able to pay for prioritized access to ensure the smooth operation of their services. This practice does not inherently disadvantage other users or content providers, it simply allows for the efficient allocation of network resources based on specific needs. Businesses and organizations with critical operations can establish private networks dedicated solely to their needs. Hospitals and healthcare providers need to prioritize medical data traffic to take advantage of innovation in long-distance image technology to ensure uninterrupted transmission of critical health information. 

Separating private network traffic from the public internet can reduce congestion and minimize data transmission latency (delays). Imagine a highway system with dedicated lanes for emergency vehicles and public transport. Private networks function similarly, ensuring critical data flows smoothly, and they can offer far greater control over security protocols and access. 

Prioritization for private networks allows companies to have more control over their networks’ security measures to fit their specific needs, safeguarding sensitive data internally and allowing them to implement more robust security measures without impacting the broader internet ecosystem. 

The myth of net neutrality has been perpetuated by those who seek greater government control over the internet rather than trusting in the free market’s ability to drive innovation and protect consumer interests. By rejecting this myth and embracing a market-driven approach to internet services, we can ensure a more vibrant, secure, and responsive online ecosystem that benefits all users.