Net Neutrality Is Dead As A Doornail Under Trump 2.0

from the I-hope-you-like-being-ripped-off-by-Comcast dept

While the concept has been endlessly demonized by right wing media (working hand in moist hand with shitty companies like AT&T and Comcast), net neutrality was always well intentioned. It was, in essence, some inconsistent, rarely enforced rules to try and prevent regional broadband monopolies from abusing their regional broadband monopolies to rip off consumers and harm competition.

The idea was portrayed as some sort of diabolical, extremist bogeyman by your shitty local cable company and Republicans. It wasn’t as good as a “fix” for broken U.S. broadband markets as taking direct aim at telecom monopoly power with serious antitrust reform, but in a country where Congress is literally too corrupt to pass the most basic of meaningful reforms, it was one of the only options on the table.

But the focus on net neutrality specifically has proven to be a bit of a distraction from the real fight: whether or not you think the government has a responsibility to protect the public and markets from massive, predatory telecom monopolies bone-grafted to our intelligence gathering systems.

Time and time again, Republicans (and some Democrats), working hand in hand with telecom industry lobbyists, decided that the best approach is to let a company like Comcast or AT&T not only do whatever it wants, but dictate the entire contours of federal and state telecom policy. That means banning community broadband. That means ripping off the poor. That means no coherent consumer protection. No real merger review. Lots of tax cuts and subsidies in exchange for doing nothing.

You know, for freedom. And innovation. And “free markets.”

The result has historically been U.S. consumers paying some of the highest prices in the developed world for patchy, slow broadband with some of the worst customer service of any industry in America (quite a feat). And when the government tries to do absolutely anything differently, Republicans, some centrist Democrats, the courts, and a corporate press treat it as an act of radical overreach.

Your Dead Aunt Opposed Net Neutrality

You might recall that the FCC’s 2015 net neutrality rules were stripped away in 2017 during Trump’s first term, when his agency, led by Ajit Pai and Brendan Carr, turned a blind eye as telecom giants used fake and dead people to pretend eliminating the rules had public support (it didn’t, net neutrality protections actually have very broad, bipartisan support across a majority of the electorate).

The rules were restored again this year by the Biden FCC, only to be immediately put on ice by the Trumplican-stocked 5th Circuit, 6th Circuit, and Supreme Court — which are trying to declare (quite successfully) that all consumer protection is basically now illegal (I wish I was being hyperbolic).

Even if the courts don’t crush the FCC’s attempted restoration of the rules, Trump’s appointment of Brendan Carr to the FCC is all but certain to deliver a killing blow to federal net neutrality protections. And not just net neutrality: Carr’s guaranteed to put an end to all consumer protection, whether it involves policing usage caps, stopping racism in fiber deployment, keeping your cable company from ripping you off, or holding your wireless provider semi-accountable for spying on your every movement.

Again, the conversation gets fixated on “net neutrality,” but this is really a debate about whether the federal government plays a role in protecting markets and consumers from giant, lumbering monopolies dead set on using their size and leverage to rip you off and quash competition. The feds never did a particularly good job on this front, but at least there was, as with net neutrality, a fleeting effort.

Any Pretense Of Giving A Shit Is Dead Now

Not all is lost: Trump’s 2017 net neutrality repeal not only tried to block the FCC from broadband consumer protection, they tried to ban states from protecting consumers or passing their own state-level net neutrality rules. But courts have repeatedly ruled that if the federal government abdicates its responsibilities on consumer protection, they can’t step in and tell states what to do.

The problem: once the unholy alliance of authoritarianism and corporate power get done corrupting Congress and federal regulators (with the help of a Supreme Court and both houses of Congress), where exactly do you think they’re going to direct their vast resources and legal attention? State rights (so seemingly precious to Republican ideology once upon a time), of course.

With the planned Trumpist dismantling of federal governance, the fights over consumer protection, immigration, environmental law, public safety, etc., will be heading to the state level and clogging the courts in historic fashion. Anybody who thinks even well-resourced states like California and Washington will have the time and resources for wonky net neutrality policy battles are probably clowning themselves.

So for now, the battle over net neutrality — and any sort of consistent federal consumer protection standards — are dead as a doornail. Thanks to voters deluded and misinformed into believing they were voting for populist reform or getting an upgrade to the mean old status quo.

That’s not to say people shouldn’t stop fighting. Though they will need to pick the most efficient targets. The key one in telecom being consolidated telecom monopoly power. There’s a huge grass roots U.S. movement toward highly-localized, community owned and operated community owned broadband networks; and if you’re looking for a place where you can help, supporting them is a great start.

States may not pick net neutrality fights they can’t win, but they won’t give up on broadband and wireless consumer protection entirely. They’ll just be sporadic, be more hesitant than ever, and take longer than ever due to a court system flooded with well-funded challenges to any effort to hold corporations accountable across every industry that touches every last aspect of your daily life.

There are a lot of hard lessons coming (and not just for Trumpers) about the importance of a coherent, federal, regulatory state. Hopefully those lessons come in handy during the attempt to rebuild functioning federal governance, assuming this hot mess of an oligarchic kakistocracy makes it out the other side of this tunnel of violent idiocy intact.

Filed Under: , , , , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Net Neutrality Is Dead As A Doornail Under Trump 2.0”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
83 Comments

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:2

Ok.

I am happy that our federal government is being populated with tv celebrity has beens, this will certainly result in a much better world. They will conquer all the worlds problems on day one! Everything will be fixed and everyone will be happy.

Is this ok for you, does it make your day better in any way?

/bullshit

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
BernardoVerda (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2

Actually, the WW III references are generally brought in by MAGA types.

They’re basically claiming that the Dems/”left” support of Ukraine against the Russian invasion is reckless escalation that will likely sooner or later provoke (“force”) Russia to retaliate using nuclear weapons (“in self-defense” against “NATO expansion”) — but that Trump in his wisdom and deep understanding of real-politik and moral firmness will easily resolve this conflict fairly and peacefully.

It’s not “doom-speak” to point out that in reality, Trump will ultimately make things worse, rather than better — including in particular the global geo-political situations that his fans think Trump will magically solve with trivial ease.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:6

Ending the war in 24 hours involves giving Russia everything it wants, thus encouraging it to continue its aggression. Trump will try to pull as much funding from our allies as possible. That will destabilize some countries and contribute to an escalation of regional conflicts that are bad for our economy because we live in an international world where a war in a particular region can limit the resources we can import from there or the markets we can export to.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:7

Ending a war in twenty four hours is a ridiculous thing to say one can do. But then Donald is not known for his intelligence.

The war continues even if no one is firing weapons. There will continue to be famine, disease, and countless tragedy. Who is going to do anything to stop the inevitable?

Will Russia continue with their planned genocide of the Ukrainian people? idk. Donald will not stop that either.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: We need a FEDERAL net neutrality act

Wouldn’t that be nice.

In a well-run place that’s exactly what would happen. But with the corruption that already exists in Congress?

Hey, if anybody can think of a way to make it happen, please let us know. But, forgive me, I’m not holding out much hope right now.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

KAIT says:

Re: HA!

Well you would actually have to have a rule/law that would NOT be written by Cogent Communications and Netflix because the have bad peering deals and refuse to pay their bills. And You have those who claim the internet will fall apart without the fake laws- even though the Internet has been running the same way for over 20 years with OUT any issues. SMH

The only thing that happens is you and goons want to regulate something and get that 13% USF to spend on BS to claim you’re protected. Give it up.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
n00bdragon (profile) says:

It doesn’t matter. None of this matters. You can’t convince people. They don’t want to be convinced. They want… whatever is happening and is going to happen. They want it with open eyes and willful hearts.

There’s no avoiding the shitstorm. The only consideration I think is prudent is getting a good umbrella.

n00bdragon (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

If there’s one saving grace to Trump, it’s that he is wholly incompetent and he surrounds himself with incompetents. I don’t expect any of the “big ideas” of his or his cronies to actually come to fruition. I do expect four years of constant chaos and mismanagement.

Trump is driving the car, but he’s not a good enough driver to maliciously create a wreck that will kill everyone onboard. He is, however, completely baked off his gourd behind the wheel and is driven by alternatively malicious and idiotic impulses.

BernardoVerda (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:2

This time around, his enablers understand the situation better, and have planned better, to achieve their goals — Trump is not the cause of the current state of affairs, but a symptom.

The people behind the political machinery that the ideological/religious fundamentalist/ultra-wealthy coalition built up over several decades, and that Trump exploited to achieve office, still support him (even though they despise him) — because Trump makes an excellent, attention-grabbing, charismatic figurehead at the front, while they actually run the ship and steer it in the direction they want to go.

It’s a fundamental mistake to think that Trump’s second term can be expected go like his first one did. Much thought and planning has gone into sidelining and negating those elements of American political process that hindered them last time, and substituting them more amenable or controllable replacements, at the level where the real work actually gets done.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re:

I hope you get what you want.

I pray you’ll understand what you get.

I suspect you’ll hate the consequences of what you get.

I bet you’ll whine about those consequences.

I doubt you’ll learn anything from the experience.

I know you’ll still vote against your best interests.

Stephen T. Stone (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:

You might want to remember that victory has a price. I hope they get what they want only in the sense that I hope they feel the consequences of getting exactly what they asked for and wonder why the fuck they asked for it in the first place. Consequences can be educational; whether a Trumpist can learn from those consequences is a whole other matter.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

Well, if you see internet as a fundamental right like water or education, net neutrality is mandatory.
But, if you’re a rich, you can see internet just as water and education, where you paid more for better service, like a 100k$/year school or a $5 water bottle.
And rich people are even willing to pay much more just to feel superior to others. And the next US President needs to feel superior to others.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

A problem is that rich people tend to be not well educated in the realities of the world today. For example, Donald thinks that one needs to present identification at the grocery store in order to purchase groceries. The dude has never been in a grocery store buying groceries – obviously. And yet these ill informed crusaders have decided that they know everything and the educated people should shutup.

Many rich folk waste their money on the most ridiculous shit. Super boats are stupid but a multi million dollar banana stuck on a wall with duct tape is possibly the winner of the stupid award of the week. And they brag about it at their cocktail parties.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re: Re: Re:

And then when maga does actually visit a grocery store, they are wearing invisible blinders or something because they completely miss the price markers plainly displayed right in front of the eggs.

J.D. Vance attempted to point out high prices in a recent campaign stunt at a grocery store, only to be caught with egg on his face

https://www.yahoo.com/news/j-d-vance-caught-lying-151334443.html

BernardoVerda (profile) says:

Re:

I few years ago I learned that the rich have their own, prestige brands of things like (for example) refrigerators and ranges.

The significant thing about these appliances is that they aren’t actually any better quality or reliability (may even be worse) than the equivalent items the rest of us get from Sears or Home Depot — but they are significantly more expensive — so the only actual benefit they convey is to subtly let their equally well off visitors see that they are of the same class, without appearing to blatantly flaunt their higher position to less wealthy, unaware lower class acquaintances, who likely never even see these brands in their own shopping venues.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
Anonymous Coward says:

One more crisis for the pile.
Is it me or has the right’s decades-long undermining of all institutions been its own kind of flooding the zone with shit.

Healthcare, education, worker rights, customer rights, environment protection, infrastructure, science… when so much trust has already been corroded away and so much is already pretty enshitified, it’s not surprising the average American can’t give a shit about much of anything but their own most immediate concerns and say fuck everyone else… and the more alien they are to my life, the harder they can get fucked…

maga, indeed.

terribly tired (profile) says:

Re:

The only reason they’ve gotten where they are is the decades spent undermining public education, and forcibly injecting Jesus humping in lieu of any actual knowledge or skillset. Combined with the no-holds-barred insanity that is their equating fact and opinion and you’ve ensured millions and millions and millions can no longer even parse the very words used to condemn them to their current state of pliable, compliant, and frothing at the mouth.

Reversing this will take re-educating an entire generation, at minimum. Good luck. I can only see this ending with America manifest-destinying its way into an early grave to the sounds of rapturous applause from within.

Anonymous Coward says:

Re:

Don’t forget that any attempt to put a stop to it was met with finger-wagging by supposedly-intelligent people who believe that if we actually used any political power to try and stop it, it would heave led to a dystopia or some other such slippery-slope fallacy, and it would make us just as bad as the people who want to kill us.

This comment has been deemed insightful by the community.
terribly tired (profile) says:

I just hope the EU realises — soon — that way, way too much of the internet’s backbone is housed over yonder, and that it will need to chance, given the US can no longer be counted on not to renege on anything at any time, for any reason.

I’d pay very nearly any damn tax if it meant my data didn’t pass through the US on its way to anywhere but the US, for exactly the same reasons I don’t want my data captured by Chinese servers.

Anonymous Coward says:

There are a lot of very worried network engineers...

…who are anticipating that the Trump regime will attempt to force radical changes in how Internet traffic handled, including tampering with the RIR (which in this case is ARIN). There are ongoing discussions (some public, some private) over how to detect and mitigate the damage resulting from such meddling.

This is a very big deal, because screwing with the RIR can break a lot of things very badly very quickly. Nobody with any sense or judgment would even consider doing this, but of course those qualities are completely lacking among the Trumpists, who only care about (a) worshipping their demented leader and (b) hurting as many women, minorities, LGBTQ folks, immigrants, etc. as they possibly can.

I miss Jon Postel dearly (and if you don’t recognize that name: you should) but I’m grateful he didn’t live to see this day.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a BestNetTech Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

BestNetTech community members with BestNetTech Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the BestNetTech Insider Shop »

Follow BestNetTech

BestNetTech Daily Newsletter

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get all our posts in your inbox with the BestNetTech Daily Newsletter!

We don’t spam. Read our privacy policy for more info.

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
BestNetTech Deals
BestNetTech Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the BestNetTech Insider Discord channel...
Loading...
Older Stuff
05:28 Final FCC Net Neutrality Rules Address 'Fast Lane' Loophole That Worried Critics (8)
10:45 Net Neutrality Is Back! For Now. (32)
05:25 Biden's New Net Neutrality Rules Don't Prevent Anti-Competitive "Fast Lanes" (52)
05:24 New Net Neutrality Rules Won't Harm Telecom Giants In The Slightest (13)
05:28 FCC Prepares To Restore Net Neutrality, But The New Rules Might Be Weaker Than The Ones Discarded By Trump (15)
05:21 The Net Neutrality Fight Will Soon Return, And The Bickering Will Be As Stupid As Ever (119)
05:25 Netflix Suddenly Cares About Net Neutrality Again After Comcast's Peacock NFL Success (9)
05:27 Big Telecom Allied GOP Lawmakers Pretend New FCC Net Neutrality Push Is 'Unlawful' (17)
05:20 Trump FCC Pick Nathan Simington Wants You To Think Net Neutrality Is A Secret Cabal By Big Tech To 'Censor Conservatives' (62)
05:26 Bloomberg Lazily Helps Telecom Lobby Seed The Press With Bullshit Claims About Net Neutrality (14)
15:58 Biden FCC Prepares To 'Restore Net Neutrality,' But The Details Will Matter (13)
05:23 Net Neutrality's Dead: Time To Focus On The Real Issue: Telecom Monopolization (25)
05:38 Ready Or Not, Here Comes Net Neutrality War 2.0 (8)
10:44 UK Eyes Scaling Back Net Neutrality Rules For No Coherent Reason (16)
06:33 Telecom Lobbyists At WISPA, NCTA Throw Hissy Fit Over Doomed Net Neutrality Bill (6)
05:32 Democrats "Strategically" Push Net Neutrality Bill That Won't Pass And Won't Be Noticed In The Summer Heat (19)
05:21 Democrats Hope To Gotcha The GOP With Doomed New Net Neutrality Bill (43)
05:30 Survey Shows Majority Of GOP Voters Support Restoring Net Neutrality (31)
06:25 Big Telecom Finally Ends Quest To Stop States From Protecting Broadband Consumers (35)
05:56 Big Telecom's Quest To Ban States From Protecting Broadband Consumers Continues To Go... Poorly (13)
12:15 Courts (Again) Shoot Down Telecom Lobby's Attempt To Kill State-Level Net Neutrality Rules (5)
04:48 Dumb Telecom Take Of The Week: Because The Internet Didn't Explode, Killing Net Neutrality Must Not Have Mattered (23)
09:37 British Telecom Wants Netflix To Pay A Tax Simply Because Squid Game Is Popular (32)
04:55 Axios Parrots A Lot Of Dumb, Debunked Nonsense About Net Neutrality (54)
10:50 NY AG Proves Broadband Industry Funded Phony Public Support For Attack On Net Neutrality (10)
06:24 The GOP Is Using Veterans As Props To Demonize Net Neutrality (22)
06:03 Telecom Using Veterans As Props To Demonize California's New Net Neutrality Law (12)
09:32 AT&T Whines That California Net Neutrality Rules Are Forcing It To Behave (11)
06:23 The New York Times (Falsely) Informs Its 7 Million Readers Net Neutrality Is 'Pointless' (51)
15:34 Facebook's Australian News Ban Did Demonstrate The Evil Of Zero Rating (18)
More arrow