[zanny]

They get things like the Binge On program T-Mobile did. Which was really not beneificial to consumers either, but consumers can perceive it as such - ie, T-Mobile knew they had revenues in excess of the cost of subsidizing favored video and music streaming services, so they made them not count for the data cap they put on their customers. They spin the story to be their great charity in giving away all this data, when the reality was the cost of operating their network was sufficiently low enough they could be providing unlimited bandwidth (or just substantially higher caps) while still profiting, but would rather have the best of both worlds where large media consumers use their platform for the cherry picked unlimited while still exploiting their customer base on every other network attached service they use.

Naturally, ISPs (if they care enough to do so) can spin their money grabs as giving away popular services for free (often after said services paid them off) while simultaneously limiting data or bandwidth for everything else.

Anything but the dumb pipe ethernet grid is a money grab. Hell, fixed data speeds we have now are money grabs. The reality is that there is a variable amount of bandwidth in a given network, and if ISPs were not exploitative they would guarantee a minimum speed but allow users to saturate the network as much as they can, because that is how the reality of the network operates. As it is, you get somewhere between 0 and your cap speed and are artificially throttled at the cap through anti-consumer behavior they can get away with because there is no competition in infrastructure.