The Broadband Industry Is Now Officially Blaming Google (Alphabet) For...Everything

from the glass-houses dept

From net neutrality to municipal broadband, to new broadband privacy rules and a quest to open up the cable set top box to competition, we've noted repeatedly that the FCC under Tom Wheeler isn't the same FCC we've learned to grumble about over the years. For a twenty-year stretch, regardless of party control, the agency was utterly, dismally apathetic to the lack of competition in the broadband space. But under Wheeler, the FCC has not only made broadband competition a priority, but has engaged in other bizarre, uncharacteristic behaviors -- like using actual real-world data to influence policy decisions.

Obviously, this doesn't please incumbent telecom operators like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast, who grew pretty comfortable with an FCC that asked "how high" when commanded to jump. The reality is that this is just what it looks like when a regulator does its job and tries to fix a very broken market. But incapable of admitting the broadband market's horribly broken, the telecom industry instead seems intent on pointing fingers elsewhere. In a strange story over at Politico, broadband providers blame Google for absolutely everything the FCC has been up to.

The quest to open the set top box, the quest for more unlicensed spectrum, and the quest for better consumer privacy controls? All the fault of Alphabet and Google:
The cable industry-led Future of TV Coalition earlier this year suggested Google had "a sneak preview" of the FCC’s February plan to open up the set-top box market to new competitors. The move would require pay-TV companies to make their content streams available to third parties that want to build and sell their own boxes — a move that cable firms say is designed to benefit Google, which has already demonstrated a prototype cable box to regulators.

AT&T, meanwhile, has charged that the agency is placing its "thumb on the scale" in favor of Google via Wheeler's March proposal to impose strict privacy rules on broadband companies. The plan, according to AT&T and others, would put telecom firms at a disadvantage compared with Internet companies like Google, which wouldn't fall under the FCC rules. Internet firms' privacy practices are policed by the Federal Trade Commission, which is seen as less prescriptive.

On another front, the National Association of Broadcasters argued that Google led a behind-the-scenes push at the FCC to set aside more unlicensed airwaves — something that could boost Wi-Fi networks that support the company's products and services. NAB says this FCC set-aside allows Google to avoid having to pay for spectrum during the FCC's current incentive auction.
The telecom industry taking pot shots at Google is certainly nothing new; in fact the net neutrality debate basically began in 2005 when then AT&T CEO Ed Whitacre proudly proclaimed that Google wouldn't be able to "ride his pipes for free." Traditionally though, the telecom industry has used third-party consultants, think tanks, and other policy tendrils to hurl strange attacks at Google. These new, more direct attacks are a sign of increased desperation.

This desperation originates with two things, one of them being Google Fiber. Though admittedly still limited in reach, Google Fiber has managed to light a fire under the apathetic posteriors of telecom giants that previously had little to no impetus to upgrade networks. It has managed to generate a national conversation about the sorry state of broadband competition, and even managed to illuminate the telecom sector's love of state protectionist laws that prevent community broadband and even public/private partnerships. In short, the broadband industry's mostly just pissed that they're now facing some competition (which is why they've resorted to lawsuits to slow Google Fiber's expansion).

The other thing on telecom executives' minds is the fact that with the broadband market saturated, they're turning to advertising and content to try and attain quarterly growth. That's why Verizon's been gobbling up companies like AOL and blowing kisses at Millennials in a quest to magically become the new Facebook or Google. But these ISPs face new neutrality and privacy regulations that Google doesn't have to worry about, solely because there's no competition in the broadband space (read: you have a choice in search engines, but often not in ISPs). This lack of competition isn't Google's fault. It's the fault of the carriers themselves and generations of lobbying.

The telecom industry has invited the wrath of regulators for years with a laundry list of bad behavior. The FCC's privacy rules weren't driven by Google, they were driven by Verizon's decision to use stealth cookies users couldn't opt out of to covertly track customers around the Internet. Net neutrality wasn't created by Google, it was created thanks to AT&T threatening to charge Google a "just because we can" toll. And while Google has lobbied to open up the cable set top box to competition, this idea is actually more than a decade old, driven primarily by the fact that the industry enjoys $20 billion in captive revenue thanks to absolutely no serious cable set top hardware competition whatsoever.

Yes, Google and Alphabet have become lobbying behemoths since Google first started ramping up its lobbying apparatus around 2007. And yes, like any large company, Google spends a good amount of its time lobbying to saddle the other guy with additional regulations -- something that will only increase as the company inevitably shifts from innovation to turf protection. And we've already started to witness this turn; most notably in the way Google turned its back on net neutrality in the States and abroad the last few years.

A saint Google isn't, but to suggest that the FCC is suddenly doing its job entirely because of Google lobbying borders on the comical, especially coming from an industry that has had its lobbying talons deep in the federal government for more than a generation. It's much the same way that ISPs and their loyal politicians have taken to attacking Netflix for daring to criticize usage caps and standing up for net neutrality. It's snide hubris from a sector that can't come to terms with the fact that a generation of telecom regulatory capture is finally starting to crumble. Instead of adapting to shifting markets, the telecom sector would rather blame "big tech" for a firestorm of regulatory activity it brought down upon itself.

Reader Comments

The First Word

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 18 Apr 2016 @ 5:05am

    Why not?

    Works for Hollywood and the Recording industry after all.

    Something not working as well as you hoped? Blame Google!
    Market shift leaving you in the dust? Blame Google!
    Some jerk key your car? Blame Google!

    There's nothing you can't blame Google for if you're determined enough to blame anyone but yourself!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Sheeple-Veiw, 18 Apr 2016 @ 8:51am

      Re: Why not?

      I've seen those google streetview guy's they are jerks, Keyed my car and everyone on the block so that when they drove by we would all look bad!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2016 @ 10:49am

      Re: Why not?

      Blame: "piracy", Google, terrorism.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Bruce C., 18 Apr 2016 @ 5:23pm

      Re: Why not?

      Or better yet, blame Google for things you've done yourself.
      "The cable industry-led Future of TV Coalition earlier this year suggested Google had "a sneak preview" of the FCC’s February plan to open up the set-top box market to new competitors."

      You mean like the boiler-plate legislation that the incumbents have provided to their congressional and statehouse shills to push through?

      Comcast: "We're gonna need a bigger lobbyist."

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Andy, 18 Apr 2016 @ 7:12pm

      Re: Why not?

      And sadly for everyone involved in attacking google is that it is such a popular search engine that if they were ever blocked by an ISP in America they would probably not be able to stop the people fleeing to other services, or just cutting the internet off and going wireless, which i have today read is happening much more than was previously thought with a huge percentage of Americans forgoing home cable broadband for wireless which is exactly what the wireless carries want as they charge 10x the cost for wireless communications compared to home broadband and have really silly caps that any normal person would use within a few hours of a new months cap. Damn i can browse YouTube for a few hours and 4-6gb of data is used up completely, yet most caps start at 1gb or even 500mb per month...500mb , enough to watch about 60 minutes of video on youtube.Or 10x6 minute clips, . damn i use 500mb just looking for something to watch.
      In the UK i get unlimited data for £16.50 a month at 36mb stable and reliable speeds, not cut of one since i signed up 7 years ago. And yes i live in a very small village with the nearest large city over 100 miles away.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    TheResidentSkeptic (profile), 18 Apr 2016 @ 5:58am

    Incorrect classification of companies

    As the FCC has now classified "broadband" as 25MB+, most of these companies no longer qualify to be called broadband providers...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2016 @ 7:09am

      Re: Incorrect classification of companies

      Verizon keeps telling me I need faster internet and has given me at least one free upgrade and I paid for another. Right now I am paying for 75mps and got 68down/54up on a speed test I just ran.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That Anonymous Coward (profile), 18 Apr 2016 @ 6:52am

    How dare Google pretend that the system has been weighted in favor of industry at the expense of big business.
    So what if we took billions and never delivered on promises.
    So what if we refuse to provide service at a fair price.
    So what if we look for new ways to earn more while doing less.
    So what if we control all the markets & use laws to avoid competition.

    The "free market" sorting all of this out has merely lead to dinosaurs picking their favored feeding grounds, lying about what they might do, and screwing consumers. Its time we actually have law makers who put citizens above corporate citizens who buy their support for small change.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2016 @ 6:55am

    Considering the Obama administration is completely bought and paid for by Google, this article is most amusing.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2016 @ 7:14am

    and this is exactly what is happening with the whole entertainment industries! rather than put up some competition, to listen and deliver on what customers want, adapt to the changing markets, the new innovative companies and their ways of achieving what the industries do, but a lot easier, quicker, at better quality, all they have done is the same as the telecoms, go running to their paid politicians and congressmen, begging for help before the industry disappears into oblivion, taking the latest record breaking movie returns with them, and blocking as many of the new companies as possible, so that the customers continue to get crap service at exortionate prices!! good ol' US of A, land of plenty, as long as the plenty refers to being stopped at every turn from doing something new, while keeping the same old shit at the forefront via the most corrupted bunch of politicians on the planet!!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2016 @ 7:17am

    Sometimes similar positions aren't a conspiracy.

    "There's a difference between us. You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom. And I go to make sure that they have it."

    --Braveheart

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2016 @ 7:21am

    Always accuse the competition of doing whatever you're guilty of.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    New Mexico Mark, 18 Apr 2016 @ 7:43am

    I refuse to have a conversation about

    home Internet speed without bringing up Google fiber. We don't have it yet in our area, and many of my IT colleagues use the TWC "up to" 30 Mb/s download and "up to" 5 Mb/s upload tier. (We also compare prices, and are well aware of the pricing games these #)@$*s play.)

    My usual rant is, "Imaging paying somewhat less than you are paying now for your current 30/5 plan for 30 TIMES your current MAXIMUM download bandwidth and 200 TIMES your current MAXIMUM upload bandwidth."

    The only problem is having to mop up the drool.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Lenny, 18 Apr 2016 @ 8:18am

    tell me 'bout the rabbits George

    The best laid plans of mice and men...

    It always amuses me when bad behavior backed by regulatory capture comes back to bite the greedy turds in the ass. It can take decades but well worth the wait.

    Too bad it has to come to that, everything is cyclical though because we correct nothing until it's nigh on too late and then, when we do, it swings wildly in the other direction until it's at the edge of ruin and the whole process starts over. Yay us!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    laissez faire, 18 Apr 2016 @ 8:21am

    active government intervention

    It's a sign wave

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 18 Apr 2016 @ 10:09am

    All they have to do is get some politician on their payroll to say google is terrorism, no need to provide evidence or facts just say it and get their mouthpieces to support it.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    AnonCow, 18 Apr 2016 @ 10:10am

    The downside of a monopoly is that it is really easy to determine who is to blame for a substandard product.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    DannyB (profile), 18 Apr 2016 @ 10:32am

    Google actually undermines businesses that we don't need

    Google actually undermines businesses that we don't need.

    I can see why those businesses complain and gripe.

    I was just watching a Google Tech Talk a couple days ago about how technology is putting a dent in human trafficking. (yes, really)

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Joe, 19 Apr 2016 @ 11:09am

    AHAHAHAHAHA!!!

    "Verizon's been gobbling up companies like AOL and blowing kisses at Millennials in a quest to magically become the new Facebook or Google."

    Yes Verizon keep buying dead companies, old men will never learn.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.