Internet Tiered Pricing will Hamper Latinos

*I was asked to write an op-ed on Latinos and net neutrality for the Houston Chronicle. This is what I wrote. It was published last Sunday. VL

By Victor Landa, NewsTaco

I remember a time, not too long ago, when any discussion about Latinos and the Internet centered on the digital divide. It was a haunting chasm that stretched between the Latino community and their future in general. We were worried that Latinos, because of our lack of computer literacy, and lack of resources to plug-in to digital technology, would be left behind while the rest of the country sped down the information superhighway.

That was then. A mere ten years ago.

There is no such worry today. According to a Pew Research study, Latinos have bridged the divide in an astonishing way. 78 percent of Latinos say they go online, up from 64 percent in 2009. 86 percent of Latinos say they own a cell phone – 49 percent own a smartphone. And here’s the most interesting statistic: three out of four Latinos go online using their mobile devices. Among whites the number is 60 percent.

This is important for two reasons. First, because we all agree that the internet, specifically mobile connectivity among Latinos, has encouraged a wave of entrepreneurial spirit. Web-based and -supported businesses have sprouted and thrived through the sheer force of resourcefulness and creativity. And second, it’s important because throughout history the energy that has fueled the struggle for the elusive American dream has been immigrant energy. Today, that energy is thriving among Latinos.

It makes sense that Latinos would have the highest growth in online and mobile device usage. It also makes sense that for the sake of resourcefulness, creativity, and entrepreneurship, the internet should remain a level playing field where no one should have an advantage over another. That’s been the character that has spurred the growth of the web, it’s also been one of the reasons that Latinos have thrived on the internet – it’s a transformative venue where ambition and creativity matter most.

That, to the point, is Net Neutrality – the idea that the internet should remain the most democratic competitive arena. The richest person in the country shouldn‘t be able to get a better internet than anyone else.

There is, tough, an un-leveling potential. It used to be, in the days of traditional media, that power lived among those who produced content. That’s no longer the case. With the internet, the power resides with those who own the pipes and control the spigots. Namely, the internet service providers, or ISP’s. Think big, looming, conglomerate media.

The courts of law have recently given the spigot owner’s permission to wield their power, with the idea of charging a higher price for a faster internet, a practice known as paid prioritization. Net Neutrality proponents see the obvious flaws. A tiered pricing system would stifle creativity, discourage entrepreneurs and be especially harmful to Latinos and other ethnic minorities because the brunt of high pricing would fall on the use of mobile devices.

It’s simple. The internet should remain open and level. And in order to guarantee an unencumbered online Network, it should fall under the purview of the FCC as a public utility. The same courts of law that granted more power to the ISP’s also insinuated that the internet should be reclassified as a common carrier. In fact, it used to be that way, until 2005 when DSL was reclassified as a service under FCC Title I rules.

Open internet advocates agree that the best vehicle to restore and guarantee a level interweb is to reclassify ISP’s under the FCC’s Title II. And while Title II doesn’t mention paid prioritization in a literal way (the idea is a relatively new one), it does contain relevant language:

47 USC 201(b). All charges, practices, classifications, and regulations for and in connection with such communication service, shall be just and reasonable, and any such charge, practice, classification, or regulation that is unjust or unreasonable is declared to be unlawful …

47 USC 202(a). It shall be unlawful for any common carrier to make any unjust or unreasonable discrimination in charges, practices, classifications, regulations, facilities, or services for or in connection with like communication service, directly or indirectly …

Under Title II the FCC has the power to declare paid prioritization as unjust and unreasonable, and therefore prohibited.

Contrary to what some ISP’s argue, the FCC’s Title II is the only legal vehicle with enough teeth to guarantee an open and level internet. Without it Latinos, the fastest growing segment of internet users, would be negatively affected (it would also, as a consequence, hamper investment in better infrastructure). If that happens, we may be soon talking about a digital divide, again.

[Photo by Chris Heuer /Flickr]

Subscribe today!

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Must Read