Network Neutrality is for On-Line Marketers too!

Mar 17, 2008 • 3:19 pm | comments (2) by twitter Google+ | Filed Under Search Engine Strategies 2008 New York
 

If Internet access providers, such as telephone and cable companies, begin preferring certain web sites or content types over others, it will be harder for the marketing community to determine whether observed on-line behavior is due to customer choice or provider choice. In addition, the threat of extra charges for "preferred" delivery is likely to saddle on-line marketers with extra charges or degraded service. Two Network Neutrality experts analyze the ins and outs of the debate, project the next moves by FCC and Congress, and discuss potential ways that the on-line marketing community can respond.

Introduction by:

* Rebecca Lieb, Vice President & Editor-In-Chief, The ClickZ Network Speakers: * Timothy Karr, Campaign Director, Free Press * David S. Isenberg, Principal Prosultant, isen.com

There were few people who attended this session and I decided to so I'd learn something new. Rebecca Lieb does not have a iPhone as she's protesting ATT who is against Net Neutrality.

David Isenberg – Network Neutrality is a good idea, gave a speech in 2006 that lead to blocking a bill allowing Network Neutrality.

Tim Karr – Free Press is a mobilizing group for many companies and organizations that see a financial interest in this issue.

What's in it for us? If the Telephone companies that can have influence over what we do on the internet than those of us who run ads can't do our jobs. The reason this is important to us is – if the guys who run the wires pollute our ability to use the internet the way we'd like then we'll not be able to do our jobs.

The lessons learned from pervious efforts and this one is that people care and businesses should care as well. We learned that ceding policy making to the lobbyists we're not helping anyone. A lot of the internet marketing groups (that are here today) require freedom to innovate.

The people who created Google, IM, etc, were not immediately noteworthy people yet they had the freedom to create. In order to continue to innovate we need to continue to have freedom to use the internet the way we need to.

However, at this time, we're paying more for high speed internet (and at lower speed) than other parts of the world (South Korea, France, etc). We're in the process of setting up a public and private collection of groups.

Four Principles of Net Neutrality * Access – Every home and business in America must have easy access to a high speed world class communications infrastructure. Note: in Sweden you can get a internet connection up to 100 faster than ours for about 16 bucks. * Choice – Every consumer must enjoy real competition in online content to achieve higher speeds and quality. * Openness * Innovation. We haven't accomplished most of this in the United States.

Rebecca Lieb – what happens to Google if phone companies get to decide how we use the internet?

www.savetheinternet.com – join the Save the Internet Coalition to save Net Neutrality.

Suppose Verizon Internet Services has a special deal when you were looking for books favored Barnes and Noble and made Amazon come up slightly slower. Such things could happen were phone companies would control the internet bandwidth.

As analysts of the data, the response will be polluted by the Verizon would be doing. Google is behind Net Neutrality along with Yahoo but Microsoft is on the fence.

A Natural Internet carries everything

1. Costs go where they belong 2. Web is kept clean and natural 3. Innovation

Corporations have a civil duty to give us what we pay for. When I type www.food.com take me to food.com and not somewhere else – this is called Direct Navigation.

702 Spectrum issue – Conflict of interest with Broadband access and Verizon owning both DSL and 702. The current FCC juggled the auction so the same players are in place.

MicroHoo on Net Neutrality – both are kind of Neutral on Neutrality

HR 5353 – put non discrimination No one is going to hand us Net Neutrality – we'll have to fight for it.

Session provided by Marshall Sponder of The Analytics Guru, note this is provided in real time and may have typos.

Previous story: How to Build Investment Interest in Your SEO/SEM
 

Comments:

Michael Martinez

03/17/2008 09:48 pm

"Net Neutrality" is misrepresentative of what is really at stake here. Corporations like Google are trying to force consumers to pay directly for developing the infrastructure that only corporations like Google can directly benefit from. There is no direct benefit to the consumer because the services that Google and others want to create don't yet exist. Since those services don't exist, there is no way for the infrastructure builders to bill the costs out to consumers. Hence, their request that Google and other large corporations that have created the demand for the infrastructure actually pay for it and then recoup the costs through their own billings makes far better sense to consumers. We don't need to bear the burden of building a bigger playground for Google engineers.

David

03/20/2008 08:25 pm

Sorry for the late comment. Just now getting around to seoroundtable on my RSS feeds. Drop me an email if you'd like more inside information on this especially as it relates to privacy. I know some people in the thick of this fight in Washington I can put you in touch with. I've often received glazed stares when I've spoken about this with people in the search world. Good post.

blog comments powered by Disqus