FCC Boss Falsely Claims His Attacks On Net Neutrality Have Already Made The Wireless Sector More Competitive

from the up-is-down-black-is-white dept

Last week we watched as Verizon, a company that spent years telling users they didn't want or need unlimited data, was forced to bring back unlimited data. AT&T quickly followed suit with similar plans of its own, despite having spent years waging a not so subtle war on grandfathered unlimited connection customers. The reason for this sudden collective about-face? The continued rise of T-Mobile, which has increasingly brought something vaguely resembling competition to the wireless sector (even if non-price, often superficial competition remains the predominant law of the land).

While this was happening, we've been noting how new FCC boss Ajit Pai has been taking an axe to consumer protections, moving to gut broadband privacy rules, making it easier for prison telco monopolies to rip off inmate families, and killing efforts to bring competition to the cable box. Pai also recently killed off the FCC's inquiry into zero rating, after the former FCC stated Verizon and AT&T were using usage caps to give their own content an unfair market advantage.

If you ask industry lobbyists, this behavior makes Pai an incredible consumer champion. Apparently that narrative is very much alive in Pai's head as well. In a speech this week at the Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Pai was quick to proclaim that he's simply returning to an era of "light-touch" regulation of telecom, one that will result in massive, unspecified benefits to all:

"We are confident in the decades-long, cross-party consensus on light-touch Internet regulation—one that helped America’s digital economy thrive. And we are on track to returning to that successful approach.

In telecom, "light-touch regulation" is code for letting AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Charter do whatever the hell they'd like. The narrative usually goes something like this: if you free giant ISPs from the burdens of "onerous federal regulation" (like net neutrality), Utopia magically springs from the sidewalks. But as we saw during Michael Powell's tenure, this narrative is flimsy, and the blind federal deregulation of telecom only makes things worse. Why? When you let revolving door regulators like Pai and Powell run the show, their breathless dedication to industry means they intentionally overlook the lack of competition in the sector.

Eliminate functional regulatory oversight and refuse to address limited competition? The end result is... Comcast Corporation and its record-shatteringly-bad customer service, high prices, and usage caps.

But Pai took things further in his speech, actually claiming that his refusal to enforce the agency's net neutrality rules somehow resulted in a flurry of competition and a return to unlimited data:

"Earlier this month, for example, we ended the FCC’s investigation into so-called “zero-rating,” or free-data offerings. Free-data plans have proven to be popular among consumers, particularly those with low incomes, because they allow consumers to enjoy content without data limits or charges. They have also enhanced competition. Nonetheless, the FCC had put these plans under the regulatory microscope. It claimed that they were anticompetitive, would lead to the end of unlimited data plans, or otherwise limit online access. But the truth is that consumers like getting something for free, and they want their providers to compete by introducing innovative offerings. Our recent decision simply respected consumers’ preference.

The best evidence of the wisdom of our new approach is what happened afterward. In the days following our decision, all four national wireless providers in the United States announced new unlimited data plans or expanded their existing ones. Consumers are now benefiting from these offers—offers made possible by a competitive marketplace. And remember: Preemptive government regulation did not produce that result. The free market did.

That's an incredible load of nonsense. T-Mobile only still exists because federal regulators blocked AT&T from acquiring it. So in reality, it was government intervention that allowed T-Mobile to continue to exist, with the resulting competition driving AT&T and Verizon to adopt all manner of more consumer-friendly positions. It's hard work, but one needs to weigh each instance of government regulation on its merits. Insisting all regulation is good or bad is just lazy thinking, and the idea that gutting all consumer protections magically results in the telecom equivalent of Smurf village is utterly nonsensical given the industry's history.

We've also noted how zero rating has nothing to do with giving consumers "free data," though carriers have certainly conditioned consumers to think as much. Usage caps are entirely arbitrary, and are completely untethered to real-world network congestion or financial necessity. Caps and overage fees are simply glorified price hikes, and they exist as a symptom of limited competition. As competition increased, it became untenable for AT&T and Verizon to continue ignoring consumer demands, especially once T-Mobile began adding significantly more mobile subscribers than any other carrier every quarter.

The irony, of course, is that Pai was in favor of the AT&T and T-Mobile merger, which would have killed off T-Mobile's disruption entirely. He's also never seen an incumbent ISP policy idea he didn't like, and his voting history suggests he'll happily vote to approve what many expect is a looming Sprint acquisition of T-Mobile. When the resulting diminished competition from that deal results in higher prices, what's the over/under on Pai blaming himself or his love of a "light touch?"

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 6:30am

    the man is nothing short of a lying ass hole! there needs to be some serious complaints made about him and, if necessary, he needs to be prosecuted because of the way he has done everything possible to hurt the poorly paid members of society and everything possible to aid the ISPs and Telecoms companies by doing the exact opposite of what he claims!!

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

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 6:38am

    FCC is such a beauty...

    I loves me some "regulation" in the morning!

    I just cannot get over how much you guys work to get what you didn't want.

    yes yes, I know... no one like being told "i told ya so!"

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 6:47am

    People in a position or power often claim they are the reason that others succeed. It is about the only way that they will get any credit for human progress.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 6:59am

    It's true that his comment briefly made the wireless sector more competitive. Unfortunately for everyone, this comment made the wireless market less competitive by the same amount, thus exactly counteracting his comment!

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 7:12am

    Par for the course for this shitty administration and their made up #AlternativeFacts

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

  • icon
    Almost Anonymous (profile), 1 Mar 2017 @ 7:50am

    conflating different types

    A big problem I have with Pai is that he keeps conflating land-based ISPs, which were theoretically bound by the net neutrality rules, with cellular-based ISPs which I don't believe were bound in the same way (or at all). Such a basic misunderstanding makes me think he doesn't understand his own department or his job.

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

    • icon
      Karl Bode (profile), 1 Mar 2017 @ 7:52am

      Re: conflating different types

      Wireless wasn't included in the 2010 rules, but was included in 2015's do-over.

      They have long included wireless (capped, expensive) and satellite (capped, expensive) as examples of the incredible wave of competition in the sector, ignoring, intentionally, the high price of both.

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

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 7:53am

      Re: conflating different types

      or doesn't care...

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

  • identicon
    Pixelation, 1 Mar 2017 @ 7:55am

    Wrong word

    I think he needs to look up the definition of competitive. What he meant to say was lucrative.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 9:23am

    If you want to help protect NN and privacy rules you should support groups like ACLU and the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Free Press who are fighting to keep Net Neutrality and privacy rules.




    also you can set them as your charity on https://smile.amazon.com/

    also write to your House Representative and senators


    https://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information /senators_cfm.cfm?OrderBy=state

    and the FCC


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

    • icon
      ECA (profile), 1 Mar 2017 @ 2:13pm

      Re: problem

      Those hurt most are Those without money..
      Consider that about 60% of the USA has very little expendable cash..Credit or much else..
      How do we support the things we like?
      It dont matter if its Jerry's kids, the Jewish foundation, ISIS, or many other things that would HELP us and make us feel good..
      IF we aint got money, we cant SUPPORT MOST OF THIS..

      the people that HAVE MONEY,
      support the things we dont want, and have the EXCESS of money to do it, 10 times over..

      Our best way is to get others to START writing letters and sending Emails..
      GET people to understand, that OUR REPRESENTATIVES ARE EMPLOYEES.. And if they were PAID hourly...they would be getting MIN WAGE..

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

  • identicon
    Nathan, 1 Mar 2017 @ 9:48am

    Any thought to the possibility that he is being honest. That this temporary unlimited data offering is literally a play to make them look more competitive while he strips out protections and then they can cry about how unlimited isn't feasible and turn ALL unlimited users into limited by adding more network controls. IE you are now unlimited but if you aren't accessing one of their partner sites it will unfortunately "have to be throttled due to network congestion concerns".

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

  • icon
    Web_Rat (profile), 1 Mar 2017 @ 10:24am


    I can't understand is how someone that is obviously so full of it has such shiny white teeth!

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

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 1 Mar 2017 @ 2:16pm

    Any one?

    Wish to pay these folks as HOURLY, CLOCK IN/OUT employees??
    I think its time to SCARE them and place all of them on the CLOCK...If they arnt sitting at a desk doing SOMETHING they are NOT being PAID..
    IF they arnt doing the JOB we wish, they are getting FIRED..

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 2:55pm

    Since his bullshit is so shamelessly transparent, why don't we make hilarious videos proving how much of a fraud he is and post them all over? The man is a comedy goldmine.

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

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Mar 2017 @ 7:28pm

    Ajit Pai spewing lies out every orifice.

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

  • icon
    limbodog (profile), 2 Mar 2017 @ 8:03am

    "None so deaf as those that will not hear. None so blind as those that will not see." - Matthew Henry

    Of course he's lying, he's a saboteur. He's not there to make the FCC work.

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

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 10 Mar 2017 @ 11:49pm


    HOW and WHy do we pay these folks MONEY??

    The Subject they are in charge of??

    Someone tell me HOW to get this job..
    High pay for WHAT??

    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
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

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