Broadband and free speech: The ACLU's bill of wrongs

Jul 19, 2002 12:00 PM, Robert A. Saunders

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) recently launched a campaign to place broadband Internet access under the umbrella of the First Amendment. The ACLU asserts that cable companies, unless burdened with same line-sharing rules that have kept phone companies from vigorously rolling out DSL service, will soon surreptitiously limit their customers' access to the Internet. Taking a page out Hollywood's playbook, the ACLU is seeking to manipulate fears that a massive syndicate of technology companies is the new Big Brother impinging on freedom of expression in a uniquely 21st century fashion.

The ACLU and some consumer advocates seem to think that businesses, once they begin to deliver information, no longer have the right to profits or are entitled to manage their own networks. No proof has been offered that the cable giants are out to limit the access of customers to the Internet; instead vague references to the potential for menacing actions are thrown out to frighten and confuse policymakers.

The truth is that best way to ensure that cable keeps its collective nose clean is to provide an environment where viable and independent alternatives exist. Forcing so-called "open access" on the cable companies will only slow investment in broadband and stunt the growth of Internet usage, ultimately stymieing what the ACLU is seeking--the free flow of information. 

Allowing ISPs a free ride on the cable network fails to solve most of the problems the ACLU outlined in its report, made in conjunction with the Center for Digital Democracy and the Consumer Federation of America. In the ACLU white paper, "No Competition: How Monopoly Control of the Broadband Internet Threatens Free Speech," the main fears are that cable companies will engage in:

• Limitation of access to certain sites on the Internet

• Restriction of the number of computers on the broadband connection

• Denial of use for particular applications.

The proponents of open access hope that all these problems will be avoided if the government forces cable companies to let any and all competitors ride the networks they have built for next to nothing. However, the reality is that such a measure would only guarantee distinction without difference.

To promote true competition, the ACLU should look to alternative carriers that provide their own connections to the home. Telcos, fixed wireless carriers, satellite providers and (soon) electric companies represent the best hope for keeping the cable companies in line. The best measure against dirty tricks is fierce intermodal competition. Opening up cable networks won't change the nature of the game--only the existence of real facilities-based competitors in the market can do that.

Competition between broadband platforms guarantees the rights of both businesses and individuals. Although the business community seems to be in everyone's bad books these days, we should strive to remember that investment in broadband networks is ultimately meant to turn a profit, not provide a public service. Not only does the ACLU's wrong-headed initiative fail to look at the realities of the marketplace, but by lumping broadband access in with the rights our forefathers fought and died for, the ACLU verges on tarnishing the very spirit of the Bill of Rights.

Robert A. Saunders is a senior analyst with The Eastern Management Group Inc., a management consulting firm focused exclusively on the communications industry. He can be reached at rsaunders@easternmanagement.com.