Bull

A study funded by an astroturf group sponsored by AT&T, Charter, Comcast, and the telecom industry’s top lobbyists claimed that 69.9% of ‘verified’ comments received by the FCC favor repealing Net Neutrality and the FCC’s Title II classification, while only 29.5% told the FCC they want the agency to keep strong Net Neutrality policies in place.

To reach that conclusion, data analytics company Emprata had to rely on selectice and subjective interpretations of which comments were “authentic” and which were “fake.” Not surprisingly, the study’s authors were quick to dismiss more than 10 million comments that “appear to be artificial, international filings, form letters, and duplicative submissions.”

We say that isn’t a surprise considering the study was bankrolled by Broadband for America, one of the telecom industry’s biggest astroturf efforts, enlisting providers, telecom equipment manufacturers, and clueless non-profit groups as occasionally unwitting allies of the industry’s public policy agenda.

Emprata could not ignore the vast majority of comments received by the FCC favored Net Neutrality, so it undermined the authenticity of those authoring those comments and dismissed them. Once the researcher threw out comments it felt were ‘suspect,’ the majority of ‘legitimate’ comments remaining naturally favored the repeal of Net Neutrality.

AT&T relied on Emprata’s conclusions about Net Neutrality, footnoting the report that was publicly released by the FCC’s electronic comment system the same day AT&T’s own submission was made public. That’s fast research, or was AT&T furnished with an advance copy?

Although Emprata CEO Paul Salasznyk told Broadcasting & Cable that the study was “conducted in an independent fashion, forming our own conclusions using the publicly available data,” he also shot down his study’s own credibility, noting it was “difficult to determine ‘genuine’ comment submissions.”

“Emprata was also not able to authenticate the filer, address, email, or comment data used for this analysis, nor the methods used to collect those data elements,” Salasznyk admitted. “As a result, it is very difficult to draw any definitive conclusions from the comments found in the docket. Any conclusions that one might draw from the data would be based on the subset of data that they considered to be ‘real’.”

Remarkably, the conclusion Broadband for America reached about its own study was coincidentally identical to the talking point the telecom industry has relied on as a legislative solution to Net Neutrality.

“The findings further underscore the need for Congressional action to address outdated utility regulations and ensure advances in internet technologies are not hindered,” wrote the group. “We stand ready to work with lawmakers on both sides of the aisle to ensure durable Net Neutrality principles are enshrined into law.”

The industry favors a legislative solution that will likely be “Net Neutrality in name only,”  written with significant influence from the telecom industry and under the watch of corporate-friendly Republicans that dominate in Congress.

Net Neutrality defenders promptly pounced on the veracity of the study and its financing.

“Today, the telecom industry is touting a study funded by cable lobby group Broadband for America regarding the millions of comments submitted to the FCC’s public docket surrounding the agency’s plan to gut Title II net neutrality rules that prevent companies like AT&T and Verizon from charging extra fees, throttling apps and services, and censoring online content,” said Fight for the Future. “The most telling statistic in the report is that the unique comments in the docket — the ones that people took the extra time to write themselves — are overwhelmingly in favor of Title II net neutrality protections, by more than 73 to 1. So the telecom industry’s own study essentially shows what nearly all other polling on this issue has shown: that they are getting trounced when it comes to public opinion, and people from across the political spectrum overwhelmingly agree that they don’t want their ISPs to have control over what they can see and do on the Internet.”