I can't help but wryly recall those times when I was told that industry would self regulate better than the government could, and attempts to interfere with the "free market" would invariably backfire. "That which governs least governs best."
Fast forward to today, where I read this story about Verizon purposely "throttling" or "slowing down" the firefighters' data plans because they had "gone over their limit."
OK.
It seems to me that Verizon just "self regulated." No doubt Verizon profits from each GB of data it sells; why else would it be in business? That said, am I naive in thinking that, to the degree that functional (or actual) monopolies are granted and/or tolerated, is it too much to ask that the monopolists provide their services, in a very limited set of circumstances, at either a reduced rate of profit or free from profits? Wouldn't a wildfire that is literally consuming one's state fall within such limited set of circumstances?
Frankly, while I am inclined to make a specific policy point about regulations and their relation to business, I think that this simply illustrates a much larger point.
I know that Verizon could (and did) do this with or without the repeal of net neutrality rules. This is not a post about the specifics of net neutrality. Rather, I write to repeat the obvious but glorious point, made on NPR on Wednesday, that when push comes to shove, corporate America is going to act in its own interests. If doing so at the public expense is what it takes, then so be it, I guess.
One final note: since the "shareholder revolution" of the 1980s, corporate America's singular interest is profit.
No comments:
Post a Comment