Home Categories About
argument top image
Is net neutrality good or bad? Is net neutrality good or bad?
Net neutrality is good Net neutrality is good
Net neutrality is bad Net neutrality is bad
Net neutrality promotes the exchange of information Net neutrality promotes the exchange of information
Net neutrality promotes competition Net neutrality promotes competition
Net neutrality helps the internet grow by being a launching pad for new web services Net neutrality helps the internet grow by being a launching pad for new web services
Net neutrality protects service quality for lesser known sites Net neutrality protects service quality for lesser known sites
Net neutrality raises the cost of internet for consumers Net neutrality raises the cost of internet for consumers
Net neutrality reduces investment in infrastructure Net neutrality reduces investment in infrastructure
Net neutrality doesn’t allow for priority traffic Net neutrality doesn’t allow for priority traffic
Net neutrality reduces the quality of service by allowing low-quality sites to succeed Net neutrality reduces the quality of service by allowing low-quality sites to succeed
Net neutrality makes immoral content easily accessible Net neutrality makes immoral content easily accessible
Net Neutrality is expensive Net Neutrality is expensive
Debate Mini Map

Is net neutrality good or bad?
Back to question

Net neutrality is bad

< (2 of 2)

Net neutrality reduces investment in infrastructure

Without net neutrality, broadband providers would have an incentive to invest more heavily in their infrastructure.
Robyn Boerstling
< (2 of 6) Next argument >

Context

The more money the telecommunications company makes, the more money they have to spend on improving infrastructure. Net neutrality prevents telecommunications companies from pursuing a new revenue stream, limiting profits, and thereby limiting investment in infrastructure.

The Argument

It is no coincidence that since 2015, when the US implemented its net neutrality regulations, investment in broadband infrastructure has dropped. Without the ability to develop alternate revenue streams, telecommunication companies have been unable to recoup investments as quickly. If net neutrality was abandoned, telecom companies could develop revenue streams like a premium delivery service, security products, and speed optimization packages, which would allow for more innovation and infrastructure investment.[1]

Counter arguments

There is no guarantee that just because telecom companies have higher revenues, they will use those revenues to increase investments in broadband infrastructure. There are plenty of other factors that influence investment rates beyond profits, including red tape, legal regulations and market conditions. A far more likely outcome would be that board members and shareholders get richer and the quality of the product stays the same. Even the companies themselves have said that net neutrality laws do not impact infrastructure investments. In 2005, Verizon issued a statement categorically stating that investment in infrastructure was not correlated with net neutrality decisions.[2] In 2015, AT&T also confirmed that net neutrality laws would not affect business plans. Instead of falling, infrastructure spending has actually increased in the US since net neutrality laws came into effect. 2016 saw a large increase in infrastructure spending from the nation’s biggest internet service provider.[3]

Proponents

Framing

Telecommunications companies invest more in infrastructure when they have the means and the incentive to do so. Net neutrality affords telecom companies neither the means nor the incentive to promote infrastructure investment.

Premises

[P1] The more money a telecom provider has, the more it invests in infrastructure. [P2] Therefore, policies that limit telecom provider's income result in reduced infrastructure investment. [P3] Net neutrality reduces internet providers' revenue opportunities. [P4] Therefore, telecom companies have less income. [P5] Therefore, they invest less in their infrastructure.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] This is not always the case.

References

  1. https://www.asme.org/topics-resources/content/10-arguments-against-net-neutrality-part-1
  2. https://qz.com/1140466/all-the-best-arguments-for-repealing-the-federal-communication-commissions-net-neutrality-rules-proposed-by-ajit-pai/
  3. https://www.wired.com/story/the-fcc-says-net-neutrality-cripples-investment-thats-not-true/
This page was last edited on Friday, 17 Apr 2020 at 15:10 UTC

Explore related arguments