“Broadband Populists” Are Whittling Away at America’s Privately Run Internet One Cut at a Time to Establish Government-Owned Broadband, Says Leading Tech-Policy Think Tank

WASHINGTON—Motivated by visceral distrust of corporations, a loose coalition of advocacy groups and academics are methodically working to transform America’s successful private-sector Internet system into at least a heavily regulated utility if not government-owned networks, according to a new report out today from the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation (ITIF).

The leading tech-policy think tank argues these “broadband populists” would lose a frank debate about whether America should have a lightly regulated or government-owned broadband system, so instead they are working to cripple the current model through a series of tactical skirmishes over discrete issues such as broadband privacy, set-top box competition, network neutrality, and municipal broadband rules. ITIF urges policymakers to see the broader strategy for what it is and focus on the fact that a private-sector model best supports the goals most Americans want from their Internet providers: efficiency, innovation, quality, reasonable prices, and adequate coverage.

“From net neutrality and zero rating to mergers, broadband populists are using each of these smaller debates as a way of inching toward their broader goal of establishing a heavily regulated utility system or even full-blown government ownership,” said Robert Atkinson, ITIF president and the report’s lead author. “This death-by-a-thousand-cuts strategy distracts policymakers and the public from the real debate we should be having about the type of broadband industry we should have in this country: one where private companies compete to offer the best services using different technologies, or one that is heavily regulated and run by the government. While there is certainly a role for government in ensuring the system functions well, most Americans would agree that private industry should lead the way.”

The new report, co-authored with ITIF Telecom Policy Analyst Doug Brake, argues that rather than pushing for public ownership in one fell swoop, broadband populists focus on winning smaller tactical battles to obscure their true endgame. In and of themselves, these skirmishes that limit revenue or drive up costs may not be monumentally significant, but collectively they constrain the private-sector model such that it underperforms, thereby strengthening the case for a public-sector model. Furthermore, this step-by-step strategy creates the illusion that turning Internet access into a public system would be just an incremental move, not a wholesale reimagining of the U.S. broadband ecosystem as we know it.

At the same time, the report argues, broadband populists do everything they can to advance the public image of government-ownership models, which involves cherry picking only the best cases of where it might work for certain customers and communities, while private-sector providers serve a broader array of customers.

Atkinson and Brake rebut a series of erroneous claims propagated by broadband populists to suggest that a heavily regulated model would be superior to a lightly regulated one, concluding that a public model gives up on the type of competition that drives innovation to make services better, cheaper, and more broadly deployed.

“Broadband networks are a critical part of America’s digital technology ecosystem and how we continue to drive investment and innovation in these networks is worthy of robust and sustained debate,” said Atkinson. “But we need to be open and transparent about the real question here: Is America better off with a broadband industry that is structured like a vast majority of the U.S. economy, where private firms compete to provide the best offering at a competitive price, and where government limits abuse and bridges gaps when private competition doesn’t respond? Or do we want to transform this largely successful industry model into a heavily regulated utility or government-owned network? The former is clearly superior.”

“Just as a magician waves a wand to distract from what’s really going on, so too are broadband populists trying to use misdirection to obscure the true debate. I hope policymakers see through their strategy and focus on the facts,” concluded Atkinson.

Read summary.

Read report.