The rationale behind the FCC is that it's regulating a limited resource (spectrum space.) The web is not a limited resource (although
bandwidth is, but that's a different debate.) The web is also international, and we're already seeing conflicts where one country tries to force their regulations onto another. That metaphor just doesn't work where the web is concerned.
I agree that the web in the US, and specifically large social media platforms, will probably be regulated because that seems to be one of the few things both parties agree on for their own reasons. But more so because the government wants to control information and surveil citizens. I think the balkanization of the web as a whole into smaller, closed networks is probably inevitable.
But what's most depressing of all is how many people in tech and on HN would be thrilled if one needed a license to publish on the internet just because that would implicitly push most people off of the web and leave it for a privileged elite.
As bad as social media can be (and I think its harm is often oversold for political ends) having a space where anyone can publish and communicate and create freely, where different platforms can exist and cater to different needs, where media isn't entirely controlled and gatekept by corporations, is critically important. More important than any other communications paradigm before it, including the printing press.
It's really going to be sad when we burn it all down, because it seems unlikely anyone is going to make something as free and open as the web ever again.