We've pretty well established by this point that contrary to the broadband industry's claims, net neutrality didn't harm sector investment in new networks. It's not something that's debatable. Publicly-available earnings reports, SEC filings, and countless CEO statements have made that clear. So have numerous deep dives by reporters and analysts who've dug through ISP financial reports. As have numerous, lengthy reports (pdf) from consumer advocates.
And yet, FCC Boss Ajit Pai keeps falsely claiming that net neutrality demolished broadband industry investment, and that everybody should be singing his praises for stopping this investment apocalypse.
"I'm proud to say that last year, we reversed the Title II Order," Pai said in a speech hosted by the cable industry this week. "We restored the light-touch approach to network regulation that served us well for almost 20 years, paving the way for over $1.5 trillion in private investment to build out wired and wireless networks."
Of course the claim that Pai returned the broadband industry to a "light touch" approach that always existed is also false, since broadband was more heavily regulated early on than it was even under the FCC's 2015 net neutrality rules. In fact, most ISPs were regulated under Title II of the Communications Act until around 2002, when former FCC boss (turned top cable lobbyist Michael Powell) began gutting oversight of the uncompetitive sector.
"Overregulation is a major threat to investment," Pai told attendees. "And there was no better example of overregulation than the FCC’s 2015 Title II Order. This regulatory misadventure resulted in 1930s utility-style regulation being imposed on your businesses."
And by "1930s utility-style regulation" Pai means the same Title II-based ISP regulation that was in place until 2002, responsible for most of the early growth in the broadband sector. He also ignores the fact that the FCC's 2015 net neutrality rules were crafted to pre-empt most of the heavier, utility-style regulations he's complaining about.
Pai's following a pretty standard tactic for disinformation: the idea that if you repeat a falsehood often enough, it becomes entrenched as a fact in the minds of people either eager to be misled, or who don't know any better. Unfortunately for Pai, under the law the FCC can't just reverse a major regulatory action without proving significant market harm, and the courts may not find his magic math convincing in the numerous lawsuits to come.