FCC Chairman Ajit Pai has opposed
broadband consumer privacy protection safeguards largely based on a false
dichotomy: that Internet content providers, like evil Google and Facebook could
collect, process and exploit consumer usage data, while ISPs could not. See
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Ajit Pai, Re: Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and other Telecommunications Services, WC Docket No. 16-106.https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-16-39A5.pdf.
Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Ajit Pai, Re: Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and other Telecommunications Services, WC Docket No. 16-106.https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/FCC-16-39A5.pdf.
This is a
false dichotomy, because consumers willingly opt to barter their usage data in
exchange for “free” advertiser supported content access, while broadband subscribers will have to allow such surveillance and sales of usage data as a hidden or obscure cost of service.
Even though
Internet content consumers cannot negotiate with providers and have to accept “take
it or leave it terms,” Chairman Pai might perceive a viable marketplace. Consumers willingly give up privacy
protection, because they don’t know what they have to give up, they consider it
a fair trade, or they trust Federal Trade Commission safeguards to provide
adequate protection.
On the
matter of FTC protection, Chairman Pai deems an “eviction” the process by which
the FCC proposed rules would replace general, FTC privacy safeguards. He conveniently forgets that the FTC has no
jurisdiction to impose rules on common carriers, the regulatory status still
applicable to ISPs. Even if the Pai FCC
re-reclassifies Internet access as private carriage, I don’t think it’s a given
that the FTC and its apparently acceptable rules to Chairman Pai would seamlessly
and quickly come into play.
More
fundamentally Chairman Pai appears to treat conduit function and content as
able to operate in nearly identical bartering marketplaces. I respectfully disagree. It’s one thing to refrain from using Facebook
and even Google’s search function, because one cannot accept the privacy
invasions, dossier construction, data mining, and revenue accrual from
advertising auctions used by Internet content providers to finance their
services. It’s quite another matter to
opt out of wireless telecommunications services, because carriers can do the
same things and perhaps even more, based on the location determination, call
and IP address recording and other surveillance/network management functions.
Simply put,
wireless voice and data subscribers should not have to abandon any and all privacy
protections for the “privilege” of becoming a consumer. If consumers learn that Chairman Pai is
working sleepless afternoon to sanction unlimited trading of wireless consumer
data, common carrier safeguards will look increasingly essential.