• by Wendy Davis , Staff Writer @wendyndavis, August 9, 2005

The latest controversy to hit the Web concerns whether companies that provide access to the Internet should be required to let consumers visit any lawful site on the Web.

The Federal Communications Commission last week considered the issue, but issued only a statement endorsing the principle of "net neutrality." In other words, the FCC is on record as saying censorship of Web sites is a bad idea, but isn't ready to ban it just yet.

It's hard to see what the FCC's waiting for.

Internet access companies already have proven that they can block pages at will. In the United States, one Web service provider already blocked access to Vonage, a competitor. And in Canada this July Telus briefly blocked a Web site put up by the company's union during a labor dispute.

The arguments that natural forces of supply and demand will deter companies from such censorship are unrealistic. For one thing, by the time consumers realize what's happened, it's already too late; they've already been denied access to pages or services they wished to use.

Even more important, it's not as if consumers have an unlimited supply of Internet carriers choose from. In most markets, the choices are very limited. And changing carriers takes time, energy, and money.

Now that neither cable companies nor telecoms need to share their lines for DSL service, consumers likely will be left with even fewer options for broadband connections. At the very least, the government should make sure that the companies providing access don't take it upon themselves to stifle competitors, critics, or sites they simply don't like.