The EditorsApril 03, 2017
(iStock photo)

From one perspective, no immediate change occurred when the House and Senate voted recently to disapprove internet privacy protections adopted by the Federal Communications Commission in the final days of the Obama administration. Those regulations had been announced but had not yet gone into effect. Congress’s rejection of the rules merely leaves the existing policy as it was, with internet service providers free to collect and share data about their customers’ internet browsing patterns without first obtaining their specific consent. Yet this shift, along with the declared intention of the F.C.C.’s new chair, Ajit Pai, to roll back net neutrality regulations, indicates a new balance being struck between the costs that regulations impose on telecommunications companies and the benefits they secure for the public.

Proponents of repealing the privacy regulations argued that because they applied only to internet service providers and not to companies like Facebook and Google, they were an unwarranted governmental intrusion into a competitive marketplace.

Yet it is telling that the only remedy considered by Congress was to eliminate the privacy requirements for one class of corporations rather than to extend them to cover others as well. Arguably, Facebook and Google’s collection of data, across multiples devices rather than limited to a single internet connection, is far more extensive and intrusive.

There are important reasons to be concerned about the burdens that regulation imposes on competition, but there are also important reasons to be concerned about the effect of the unrestrained collection, sharing and sale of internet usage data on the way citizens—not just “consumers”—use and trust the internet.



Although its connections, sites and services are maintained by profit-oriented companies, the internet is a medium for every form of communication, whether commercial, civic or personal. Internet regulation needs to serve the common good, not only the maintenance of profit margins. Expectations of privacy on the internet are a significant component of that common good because they allow people to more easily communicate with and understand each other without first having to evaluate how every click will affect a consumer profile. The recently repealed privacy regulations were far from perfect, but that is an argument for improving them rather than abandoning them. Not all aspects of the common good can be secured by competition.
Comments are automatically closed two weeks after an article's initial publication. See our comments policy for more.

The latest from america

“I found it sad that the pope has to defend himself,” Gerard O’Connell said this week on Inside the Vatican. “EWTN is based in the United States. Can not the [U.S.] Catholic bishops’ conference defend the pope on this?”
Gerard O’ConnellSeptember 23, 2021
An LGBT choir sings outside the Pastoral Congress at the World Meeting of Families in Dublin Aug. 23. (CNS photo/Clodagh Kilcoyne, Reuters)
As with much of his pastoral approach overall, the pope’s outreach to L.G.B.T. people can be characterized by the word “accompaniment.”
James Martin, S.J.September 23, 2021
The beloved artist died Sept. 23. His works are the fruit of encountering sacred texts, accompanying the vulnerable and living every moment awake to God’s loving closeness.
Cecilia González-AndrieuSeptember 23, 2021
Maybe in this time of uncertainty, fear and doubt, it would be worth recruiting some young people like BTS, Greta Thunberg or Malala Yousafzai to officially join the pope in his fight for the future of our planet.
Jim McDermottSeptember 23, 2021