FCC's broadband speed labeling idea is misguided

Your cereal box tells you what its contents contains in the way of calories, vitamins, minerals, fats and protein. A sticker on your new car tells you how many miles per gallon it’s expected to get. And, according to statements made by the FCC this week, your broadband service eventually may come with some sort of speed rating akin to what the cereal and auto manufacturers provide.

The idea is troublesome in a number of ways.

A big one is cost. Although this kind of information could certainly be useful to a consumer who has a choice of broadband providers, I’m not at all convinced taxpayers should pay for a program to provide that information in perpetuity. Sounds more like something a private sector organization such as Consumer Reports ought to be undertaking.

There’s also an issue of priorities. The FCC already faces a huge workload in implementing the National Broadband Plan, yet it continues to create more work for itself. As if its “third way” and Net neutrality initiatives weren’t enough of a distraction, the commission once again seems to be devoting precious resources to creating a solution in search of a problem.

The FCC hasn’t said for sure that it wants to require broadband providers to offer some sort of broadband speed labeling. But it’s already dedicating substantial time and effort to exploring this idea. This week the commission announced a plan to study whether the broadband speeds that consumers receive match advertised speeds. It also released the results of a phone survey of broadband users, which it attempted to use to explain why the speed study was needed.

Eighty percent of consumers don’t know what speed they’re getting, the phone survey revealed — and based on that finding, the FCC’s consumer and governmental affairs bureau chief said “We believe we need a marketplace where broadband speed is both transparent, advertised accurately and understood.”

Yet the phone survey also found that 91% of home broadband users are either “very satisfied” or “somewhat satisfied” with their connection speed. It might be nice if consumers were more knowledgeable about broadband speeds, just like it would be nice if more high school students could point to China on a map. But neither the consumers nor the students are likely to gain the missing knowledge unless they see a reason why it’s important to them. And while I could name numerous reasons why people should know where China is, it’s more difficult to explain why people need to know their broadband speed when the satisfaction figures are so high and when the downside to choosing the wrong broadband provider is just not that big.

The upshot is that choosing the wrong broadband provider is lot less risky than buying the wrong car or eating too many Twinkies. Cars cost thousands of dollars and once you’ve bought one, you’re stuck with it. Clogged arteries may be even more difficult to reverse. But broadband service can be cancelled.