Saturday, June 27, 2026 Strategy, technology, media, and social systems

I Think

Sorin Adam Matei

Analysis, research, maps, and essays from Sorin Adam Matei.

Killing that which you want to save

The Economist takes a stance, contrarian as usual, on the issues of “preferential service” and premium fees on the Internet.

Economist.com | Articles by Subject | The internet
Yet some packets are already favoured, even on today’s internet. Businesses routinely pay a premium for fast, secure “tunnels” through the network. Firewalls and virus filters discriminate against suspicious traffic. Big companies already pay extra for hosting and “content delivery” services to make their websites download faster. This has not hampered innovation. And telecoms operators insist that they have no intention of blocking or slowing existing traffic.

An overly prescriptive set of net-neutrality rules could prove counterproductive. For a start, it would mean that all new network construction costs would have to be recouped from consumers alone, which could drive up prices or discourage investment. Ensuring “neutrality” could require regulators to interpose themselves in all kinds of agreements between network operators, content providers and consumers. If a network link is too slow to support a particular service, does that constitute a breach of neutrality? Strict rules could also hinder the development of new services that depend on being able to distinguish between different types of traffic, imposing a “one size fits all” architecture on the internet just as engineers are considering novel ways to improve its underlying design (see survey).

While the two positions might appear to be incompatible, there is in fact a sensible path that should suit everyone. A minimal set of rules to protect net neutrality would still leave room for operators to experiment with new premium services. Even Edward Whitacre, the boss of AT&T, says he is happy to go along with the simple rules proposed by America’s telecoms regulator that forbid discrimination against particular websites or services. Blocking or interfering with existing traffic on the internet is unacceptable; but if operators want to build fast lanes alongside it, they should be allowed to.

Join the discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *