If you like being offered free stuff by huge companies, try calling your cable provider and informing them that you’ll be canceling TV service in favor of an Internet-only connection. I did, and it was gratifying.

I’m a Cablevision Systems US:CVC customer in rural Connecticut, and I subscribed to the company’s “triple-play” Internet, TV and phone service for years. I’m a busy professional and a parent of small children, so I have little time for watching TV these days, and this service was expensive relative to my actual usage — except for the Internet service, which I need for all sorts of things.

After purchasing Apple TV AAPL, -3.17% , it became clear that I no longer needed cable TV service, and I rarely used a wireline phone. When I called Cablevision to cancel those items, they kept me on hold for an eternity to connect to their “Retention Department,” which didn’t seem appropriate to me.

When I finally got through, their representatives offered me several rounds of discounted promotional offerings to keep their TV service, which kept getting cheaper as I rejected them one after another. Then they gave up, and I returned my monstrous, electricity-draining cable box with it’s god-awful user interface and remote control that never worked (yes, I tried changing the batteries). That may have been the most satisfying errand I have ever run as a consumer.

On Wall Street, this is known as “cord-cutting,” and it’s a trend that’s developing among consumers — particularly the young. Many analysts argue this is something that’s only happening on the margins, and it’s unlikely to affect the pay-TV business in a substantial way. I suspect they’re wrong, and that we’ll reach a tipping point in the not-too-distant future at which most consumers will decide the Internet is an adequate medium for serving all their entertainment and information needs and traditional pay-TV subscriptions are no longer necessary or relevant.

Now, I pay about $60 a month for Cablevision’s broadband service — almost $100 less than I was paying — and I subscribe to Netflix NFLX, -0.05% so my kids can watch commercial-free kid shows. I’m also trying Hulu Plus for online access to network TV shows. There’s also online video options for sports fans, like MLB.com, and you can buy all the great TV series a la carte on iTunes if you don’t mind being a little behind the curve — who can stay current on all these shows anyway? I’ve also been pleasantly surprised by Apple TV’s library of free video podcast selections, which are excellent, including some current news shows.

Oh, and then I can access the entire Internet on my computer, which has some good stuff on it too — including independent news and commentary sources that often better informed and more accurate than our mainstream, corporate news outlets.

I have absolutely nothing against Cablevision or any other cable company and all the great people who work for them. In fact, I’ve seen Cablevision CEO Jim Dolan sing and play guitar in his rock band — he’s surprisingly talented and has excellent taste in music. I just like having options as a consumer.

I tried AT&T’s T, -0.48% U-Verse Internet service, which finally made it to my neighborhood, but it was too slow. So, like many Americans, I only have one real choice for quality Internet service, and according to the Federal Communications Commission, we pay more for Internet service than consumers in other developed countries — often substantially more — and in return, we get lower quality service.

I don’t know how this situation could sit well with any red-blooded American capitalist, except for one who is benefitting from it handsomely, like Comcast CMCSA, -0.70% CEO Brian Roberts. He wasn’t kidding when he recently justified Comcast’s impending acquisition of Time Warner Cable US:TWC by saying the two companies don’t compete. A handful of cable companies have divided up the country, and their territories don’t overlap — there really is no competition between them.

If this sounds like the way a monopoly works, that’s because it is. Therefore, we should have federal regulations — like real net neutrality rules and other consumer protections — imposed on the nation’s Internet service providers in order to promote access and competition, which would help our economy grow and innovate in the digital age.

Unfortunately, our federal government appears to be woefully corrupt and dysfunctional to most sensible people of all political leanings, and the telecommunications industry is able to deploy its lobbying strength on Capitol Hill to get basically everything it wants. This has troubling ramifications for our nation’s media future at a time when we’re undergoing a massive transformation in communications technology.

If we have limited sway over this situation as voters, though, we do have some leverage that we can wield in the free market as consumers, which is why everyone should consider their options for cutting the cord, saving money, and pressuring the handful of giant companies that control our media and access to the Internet to stop standing in the way of technological progress and move out from behind their old business model to compete for audiences on the new media playing field.

Nat Worden is a journalist whose work has appeared in The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Outside Magazine, Newsday, The Village Voice and elsewhere. He’s a vice president with GoodWorks Insurance, an independent insurance brokerage. Follow him on Twitter @NatWorden .

More from MarketWatch:

The foolproof way to lower your cable bill

5 industries that millennials are destroying

Are you ready to cut the cord?