We’ve been saying that most people will reach the Internet through mobile platforms for some time. And for some time, our colleagues have been looking at us as though we have sunstroke. But we like to break new ground and know that skeptical looks are part of the package.
Now we have a powerful ally: the New York Times.
With the majority of Internet traffic expected to shift to congestion-prone mobile networks, there is growing debate on both sides of the Atlantic about whether operators of the networks should be allowed to treat Web users differently, based on the users’ consumption.
While we were researching the subject, we did not take a position on net neutrality, but we now agree that its blind application in our settings will harm our constituents, the teleusers at the bottom of the pyramid. We do agree with the statement below, also excerpted from the NYT:
But there is a big flaw in the concept, according to the operators: Networks have never been neutral. They have always been actively managed to some extent since their inception in the 1980s to ensure that all customers get a basic “best effort” level of service.
If an operator could not restrain bandwidth hogs, who typically make up 15 percent of customers but who generate 80 percent of the traffic, most Internet users would experience poor service.
While net neutrality is an emotion loaded minefield that is not the most hospitable for evidence based discussion, we are at least happy that the mobile piece of the argument is running parallel with ours.