The Telecom Industry Is Very Mad Because The FCC MIGHT Examine High Broadband Prices

We've long noted how the FCC (regardless of party) largely ignores how muted competition and monopolization drives up prices for consumers. The agency often talks a good (if ambiguous) game about bridging the digital divide," but they don't collect and share pricing data proving market failure, nor are they capable of admitting monopolies exist and are harmful in public-facing messaging.

As part of the Communications Act, the FCC is tasked with giving periodic reports on whether broadband is being delivered to all Americans on a reasonable and timely basis." If the answer is no, the regulator is theoretically supposed to, you know, actually do something about it.

Back in November, the agency issued a Notice of Inquiry (NOI) pondering whether they should more seriously analyze the cost of broadband when making those determinations (yes, duh). As per tradition, the FCC NOI is pretty vague about things, but does acknowledge the importance of affordability:

To truly close the connectivity gap and ensure that all Americans have access to advanced telecommunications capability, broadband services must be affordable."

Keep in mind this is just the FCC saying they're thinking about taking a more consistent look at high broadband prices as part of their policy approach. It doesn't mean they'll actually do it, do it well, or punish any of the companies found to be monopolizing access and squashing competition to jack up market prices.

But even the faint possibility of the FCC looking at expensive U.S. broadband has been enough to send telecom lobbyists into a tizzy, with cable lobbying organizations arguing in filings that even asking the question is inappropriate":

While the Commission has reiterated that it has no interest in any kind of rate regulation, the proposal to make a traditional deployment analysis contingent on whether the Commission determines that broadband pricing is sufficiently affordable suggests that rate regulation in some form is potentially on the table."

The majority of Americans live under a monopoly or duopoly for broadband access protected by state and federal corruption. This muted competition consistently results in spotty coverage, high prices, slow speeds, and comically terrible customer service. And again, FCC officials can't even openly admit there's a monopoly/duopoly problem, much less field concrete solutions to the problem.

Keep in mind, between the Trump era and the first two years of Biden term (where the FCC lacked a voting majority due to the attacks on Gigi Sohn), the FCC was basically a cardboard cutout for six straight years. The telecom industry has grown fat and comfortable with the FCC performing regulatory theater where its functions are entirely decorative. A sort of regulatory simulacrum.

The fact that it's 2023 and the FCC and NTIA have only fairly recently realized they should be considering affordability in broadband access policy genuinely speaks for itself.

And in the U.S., where Comcast, Verizon and AT&T dictate the lion's share of all telecom policy, the idea of rate regulation is treated as the most extreme possibility imaginable. Having a regulator ponder things like affordable wholesale access or any sort of rate caps is genuinely treated the same way you'd treat a batshit, naked streaker in a public mall.

But the FCC is making it very clear they lack the political backbone to get anywhere near price regulation. The net neutrality restoration similarly makes it very clear that price regulation is off the table. But the simple act of even looking more closely at pricing data - so that the public has a clearer understanding of the impact of muted competition - is apparently a bridge too far for unchecked monopolists.