Internet Association debunks claims that strong Net Neutrality protections hurt internet investment

Some opponents of the FCC’s 2015 Open Internet Order claim the order created a regulatory environment that kept Internet Service Providers from investing and building better broadband. Today, the Internet Association (IA)’s Chief Economist responded, finding that ISPs continue to invest and innovate at similar or greater levels in the current regulatory environment, including after Title II reclassification of internet services. IA will release its full research paper on internet service provider (ISP) investment in the coming months. Using multiple sources, IA demonstrates that strong net neutrality protections have NOT harmed investment or innovation in our broadband networks. Some key findings include:

  • SEC filings show a 5.3% or $7.3 billion increase in telecom investment among publicly traded companies from 2013-14 to 2015-16;
  • OECD and U.S. Telecom data show a 5.1% or $4.7 billion increase in telecom investment in 2014 to 2015; and
  • SNL Kagan and NCTA: the Internet and Television Association data show a 56% or $89.9 Billion increase in cable investment from 2009 to 2016.

The Internet Association represents many of the largest and most rapidly growing internet companies. Find IA’s Net Neutrality fact sheet here.

Tomorrow, the FCC will vote on a proposed rulemaking that would begin to undo strong net neutrality protections. The ALA has and will continue to advocate for strong, enforceable net neutrality protections. You can watch the FCC’s Open Meeting live here beginning at 10:30 a.m. EDT.

About Ellen Satterwhite

Ellen Satterwhite an ALA Office for Information Technology Policy Fellow and Vice President of the Glen Echo Group. She has years of experience at the intersection of technology and policy, including as a co-author of the FCC’s National Broadband Plan and as Consumer Policy Advisor to the Commission. Satterwhite earned a Master’s in Public Affairs from the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin.

One comment

  1. Libraries were my window to the world. We didn’t have money to buy books, although my family tried to buy me as many as they could. A child like me in this economy wouldn’t stand a chance. Homework, required reading, job applications–a child without a place to work on a computer is out of luck to be an A or even a C student. Now Trump proposes to get rid of libraries. Even if he doesn’t order them closed, withholding federal funds will close them just as surely. My daughter is a librarian. She returned to school for a master’s in The Communications Department, formerly called The School of Library Sciences. Because she also holds certifications from the American Montessori Association for children 6 months to six years (actually two separate certifications) and has 10 years teaching experience in several Montessori schools, she was the head of the children’s library in several libraries. After about 12 years she went back to school for an MFA in computer design and development. She said the end of libraries was near. Sadly it seems so.

Leave a Reply

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

*