One Year Later, ISP Claims That Title II Would Demolish Broadband Investment Found To Be Total, Indisputable Bullshit
from the nostradamus-you-ain't dept
In late 2014, the Obama Administration and the FCC shocked everybody by announcing that the government would be uncharacteristically ignoring telecom lobbyists and reclassifying broadband service under Title II -- ensuring it had adequate legal foundation for tougher net neutrality rules. As you might expect, the cable and phone companies immediately set to work with a blistering public relations barrage, with think tankers, editorials, industry consultants and thousands of industry mouthpieces all making one common refrain: Title II would utterly decimate broadband sector investment and crush innovation.Ignore that the wireless industry had been classified under Title II for the majority of explosive growth years. Ignore as well that companies like Verizon had been classifying its FiOS fiber under Title II for mammoth tax breaks with no ill effect. No, according to companies like AT&T in 2014, Title II was absolutely certain to effectively usher in a telecom investment ice age that would leave the country reeling:
"Reclassification would mire the industry in years of uncertainty and litigation, and it would abruptly stall the virtuous circle of investment and innovation that has propelled the United States to the forefront of the broadband revolution."Comcast had its own similar predictions in 2014:
"The sheer uncertainty surrounding such a regulatory environment would produce ‘a profoundly negative impact on capital investment.’ By itself, reduced investment would inhibit job creation, hinder the deployment of broadband infrastructure, and undermine the ‘virtuous circle’ of innovation that the open Internet rules are designed to advance."But as the last year rolled on, people who could be bothered to actually read industry CAPEX numbers found that investment -- much of it in Google Fiber markets -- was as healthy as ever, if not better. Comcast announced plans to deploy two gigabit service to eighteen million homes, more recently unveiling plans for a major gigabit cable initiative in 2016. Time Warner Cable, Comcast and AT&T all spent much of the year crowing about notable speed upgrades and improvements, from expanded gigabit fiber pushes to housing developments, to notable DOCSIS 3.1 cable and set top box upgrades.
Closing on one year after the FCC voted to enact Title II, Kate Cox at the Consumerist did an amazing job digging through the absolute mountain of misleading claims made by AT&T, Time Warner Cable, Comcast, Verizon and Charter, and comparing them to the companies' recent earnings statements and CAPEX numbers. In nearly every case, claims of the investment apocalypse were found to be utter and undeniable bullshit, with the companies repeatedly indicating that Title II didn't impact company plans in the slightest:
"By and large, the half-dozen companies representing the overwhelming majority of cable Internet and wireless broadband customers in the country, are continuing to invest. But is that just puffed-up chest-thumping to cheer up investors? Those most directly impacted by broadband investment don’t seem terribly concerned. In January, Multichannel News reported that the suppliers who make the stuff that the telecoms spend their money on aren’t losing sleep about a decrease in investment.Shocking, right? It's almost as if think tankers, lobbyists, and other hired sockpuppets were just spouting nonsense to scare the government away from meaningful net neutrality protections. And when it became clear the data wasn't going to support their predictions, industry think tankers (and Verizon lawyers turned FCC Commissioners) concocted misleading studies claiming sector CAPEX was dropping, and are still making the same claims even now. But as we previously noted in great detail, those studies used farmed statistics and cherry picked CAPEX windows to artfully paint a picture easily disproven by spending just five minutes with any major telecom earnings report.
Of course, the fact that these companies have been proven to be lying through their teeth won't stop them from continuing their lawsuit against the FCC. If said lawsuit doesn't demolish the rules, it's entirely possible the elections will, since any Presidential victor could gut the existing FCC staff and the rules in one, fell swoop. Should that happen, the neutrality debate in the States will reset to zero, giving telecom industry disinformation artists ample opportunity to once again highlight how the broadband industry's greatest innovation isn't in broadband, but in bullshit.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: broadband, fcc, investment, net neutrality, title ii
Companies: at&t, comcast, verizon
Reader Comments
The First Word
“Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
In what world
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The prices do need to be connection based and NOT usage based.
But like normal... Obama promises... and does not deliver. I don't like Obama but I can get behind that turd for this one.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: In what world
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I translated your post into Morse so Verizon could read it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: In what world
My only guess is he was going off of the special reports he has been handed by the lobbyists. You know, the one that compares out broadband deployment to that of other third world nations.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
I am sure you could spend a lot of your time nit picking everyone's choice of communication, but I think my sentences are clear enough if you managed to graduate 5th grade.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I translated your post into Morse so Verizon could read it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Well, Dur...
They have been trying to raise prices, stop technical progress, lower consumer options, introduce lower data caps, fight unbundled content, etc. with the same damn rhetoric since before time began...
When are these very old school dinosaur thinking corporate idiots going to retire so civilization can progress?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
They are waiting for a new crop of old school dinosaurs to take their place.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: In what world
*Queue Future World Music song*
BROADBAND
...
Coming Soon to a Theatre near you
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: In what world
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: In what world
I wonder if they will get sued or fined for one of those deliberate lies in a statement to a government official (both the SEC filings and the FCC written statements they have provided qualify as such). /wishfulthinking.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I translated your post into Morse so Verizon could read it.
Perfect job, Joe.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Title II doesn't mean they'll be treated like utilities.
But like normal... Obama promises... and does not deliver.
What promise are you referring to?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Yes, and you didn't capitalize Nazi. It's a proper noun. :-)
People do get onto the net whose first language is not English. They're all using varying levels of device capabilities (ie. capitalization may be difficult). Complaining about this nowadays is just irritating. I only mind those who're intentionally irritating (like not capitalizing the first word in a sentence which is shot through with capitalized acronyms; how precious).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: I translated your post into Morse so Verizon could read it.
Ack!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
You can't blame Mike for this. You have to blame the wonderful Consumerist for having a diligent, hard working reporter, the wonderful people at Consumer Reports (who bought them), and Tom Wheeler for being in a position to use wonderful ammunition they've offered him on a platter.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Do you have any evidence for the claim that large numbers of people are switching from other ISPs to TWC, Comcast and AT&T? Because I find that very hard to believe, and the idea that they're doing it for the reasons you suggest seems laughable.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
internet
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]