Net Neutrality And Streaming Media

Net neutrality is the principle that internet service providers (ISPs) should treat all data for which they are responsible in a neutral fashion. Its conceptual origins go back to the early days of the world wide web, and it started to enter into the American political dialogue during the George W. Bush administration.

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) fought a long battle in order to institute some form of net neutrality protections. They finally did so in 2015 (toward the end of Barack Obama’s two-term presidency) only to be reversed in late 2017 under the Donald Trump-appointed FCC chairman, Ajit Pai.

A Brief Overview Of Internet Streaming

Streaming video and audio first appeared on the internet in the 1990s, when the world wide web was still very young and undeveloped. Demand for streaming media was there, but the quality simply did not suffice for most users until years later.

The technology steadily evolved following the turn of the century, and in 2007 a dramatic improvement took place when a company called Move Networks introduced HTTP-based adaptive streaming, which made bulky streams more manageable by essentially breaking them down into chunks of data.

With all of the recent advancements in both software and hardware enabling easy access to high quality streaming content, a variety of business models have flourished that provide several different options to streaming media consumers. These models are primarily centered around video on demand, including subscription-based, transaction-based, ad-supported and/or a combination of any/all of these.

The Business and Politics Of Electronic Media

Early twentieth century broadcast technology enabled all sorts of new possibilities in the spread of information. Despite their many benefits, these innovations also inevitably led to the proliferation of propaganda on a number of fronts. As an attempt to mitigate this issue, the FCC introduced the Fairness Doctrine in 1949. The influence of this policy stretched throughout most of the twentieth century, having been formally repealed in 1987 but gradually phased out for another couple decades thereafter.

During the 1990s, as the internet spread throughout the mainstream, electronic media started to become more interactive than it had ever previously been, thanks to things like online forums and other tools that gained popularity on the web. The rise of internet political campaigns soon followed, with the 2008 Obama presidential campaign capitalizing on this new technology in unprecedented ways.

With the transfer of data across the internet increasing exponentially with each passing year, information has become less centralized. This creates both benefits and drawbacks, as there are now many different sources from which to gather things like news, commentary and entertainment, which generates opportunity for competition as well as some level of corruption.

Broadcast media had traditionally targeted mass audiences during most of its early history, from the early days of motion picture technology to the advent of the “summer blockbuster” in the 1970s. But television changed this, at first gradually and then suddenly, when Ted Turner transformed his local cable enterprise (WTBS) into a large network of niche outlets. This began a trend in cable television, in which smaller and more enthusiastic audiences were pursued by broadcasters, rather than large ones.

Like cable television, the world wide web created spaces for niche consumers, but clearly on a much larger scale. Not only did users have access to more diverse content, but also innumerable new ways to access and interact with it. The human populace in general gained significantly more freedom to both access and produce, as well as distribute, content in virtually any form.

The gatekeepers have lost a lot of their power over information and content, which is very liberating to many different people and cultures. But it also affects the quality of the information and content. And the political ramifications of this grow more profound as digital technology expands and evolves. Naturally, there are both market and government forces that want to consolidate power over new media.

Both Sides Of The Argument

Arguments in favor of net neutrality come from all over the ideological spectrum, but politically, the left has been more inclined to advance its cause in the form of policy. This makes sense, given that net neutrality’s central purpose is equal access to information technology, which can be argued would benefit the public good. But there are private business interests at stake as well, such as equal opportunity for advertisers. Also, there is an argument to be made that innovation happens more freely when it is not hindered by oppressive and over concentrated corporate interest.

Those who are against net neutrality tend to have faith in equalizing forces of the unregulated (or loosely regulated) market. Whereas net neutrality proponents fear excessive private sector influence, many opponents of the policy fear that it would introduce too much government influence over things like pricing and innovation, causing both to suffer.

There are common themes among both sides of the argument, in spite of their different methodologies. All consumers want reasonable prices, quality and access to content. Censorship and manipulation can come from either side (private or public). But the more power is concentrated toward one pole, the harder it is to bring it back toward the other.

Soon after Trump’s FCC reversed net neutrality, US Congress members tried to use the Congressional Review Act (CRA) in order to undo the reversal. Although this gained support in the Senate, not enough members of the House signed on in order for there to be a vote. While pro-net neutrality activists are working toward new legislation at the federal level, some states (like California) are working on their own net neutrality policy.

Net neutrality among internet service providers is not the only issue confronting streaming video and audio platforms. Censorship and sustainable business models are also major issues at the moment. But those issues also factor into net neutrality. In order for net neutrality policy to gain momentum again, grassroots civic action will likely be needed to push it. Otherwise, perhaps the market will let competition flourish to some degree. But whoever controls information has a great deal of power, which means that checks and balances are essential to the survival of a free internet.