FCC to require ISP “labels” with service plan details/ costs

Competition in our “capitalist economy” is said to serve the public by creating alternatives for consumers/ purchasers of goods and services/ citizens. That works best when true competition exists.  In practice, capitalist behavior can lead to swallowing the competition instead of competing with it… which too often leads to eventually only a few companies at the top of the industry. “The Market” does not protect us from Monopoly capitalism all by itself.

In many cases that can only be accomplished by “governmental regulation”. Bureaucracy comes with drawbacks of its own, of course, and sometimes the cure is worse than the disease. Yet for now, until we figure out something better, we need it to protect citizens from predatory corporate behavior.

Such has been the case for ISPs, where as the below story notes, perhaps 100 million internet users in the US have access to only one reliable ISP.  Another 100 million has access to two ISPs. Without meaningful competition, the ISP can charge what it wants, on the terms it wants, because users have no, or limited alternatives. And as we know, millions have no ISP at all.

The FCC is now required to have ISPs provide labels spelling out all the important terms of service to customers. This would help bring some clarity to shady ISP business practices, such as “Unlimited Data Plans” that actually are capped and limited. Another “rip off” of long standing, is bundling services to force people to pay for access to services they don’t want. Making such practices more visible might help do away with the more egregious “gotchas” by way of public pressure.

It also may help those who struggle to afford internet service discover plans that serve them better, such as families striving to provide the appropriate level of bandwidth for Learning From Home, and Work From Home.

Here’s a link to a collection of Broadband Facts labels created in 2016, so the information is way out of date here in 2022,  but it gives one the idea of what is envisioned six years later.

OTOH, as the article notes, without real competition, what alternatives will people have if they don’t like the company they are stuck with? This is one of the chief reasons why municipal networks are promoted as viable alternatives to Big Telecom and Big Tech ISPs/ former cable companies. The concept is that municipal networks will create circumstances that offer choices for services. IOW, competition.