Net Neutrality Essay

The second video “Moyers & Company: Is Net Neutrality Dead?” is about a debate regarding net neutrality, which is the right to communicate freely online, keeping the major internet service providers like Verizon and Comcast from increasing costs for costumers to not slow down or block any content they want to use, also called price discrimination, a service offered at different prices by the same provider in different markets. As there are only few internet providers, barriers are set by limiting the area where some of them are allowed to supply their services to, limiting competition and increasing costs for consumers.

In the article, “Net neutrality hits a nerve, eliciting intense reactions”, Cecilia Kang discusses how the pending repeal of Net Neutrality by the FCC and Chairman, Ajit Pai, is adamantly contested by most of the Internet community and most companies, big or small. To develop her argument, Kang uses a wide variety of appeals from established and startup companies, statistics and evidence related to the reaction to the repeal, and demonstrations on how polarizing the issue is, and the repeal’s effect on solving the problem of Internet regulation. Kang cites a multitude of Internet-based companies or organizations, such as Mozilla, Google, Netflix, and Free Press, to demonstrate their concern and clarify their resentment of the repeal. For instance, Google and Netflix argued that “telecom companies should not be able to split sites because that would allow them to become a sort of gatekeeper.” These responses better clarify companies’ concerns about the repeal and its effect on their business, while also aiding Kang in developing her article on explaining the concern and the response it has elicited. According to Kang,

The internet is a resource with ever expanding content and applications for everyone to use however, net neutrality rules on the free use of internet remains a debated topic. The “Point/Counterpoint: Network Neutrality Nuances” presents Barbara van Schewick’s supportive argument on the applications of net neutrality rules, and the consequences of failing to do so. Schewick’s engaging justifications are well researched with arguments containing significant amounts of examples, strong and simplistic diction to reach her audience, and clean and smooth transitions to move between ideas.

It is often regarded as the notion that, the broadband service provider should charge customers only for Internet access without any form of discrimination or favoritism on content viewed by end-users from their respective content providers. The concept of “Net Neutrality” is intended to regulate price and promote competition. Simply put, it is a premised on the principle that all Internet traffic must be treated equally without bias. “Opponents of the Net neutrality on the other hand, see bandwidth as a private resource, one that is supplied most efficiently if exclusive owners take responsibility for managing and conserving it, and are able to optimize its value by exerting control over the content and application it conveys” (Yoo,

I am Aric See and I am a senior in the Weidner School of Inquiry at Plymouth High School in Plymouth Indiana. Net Neutrality is a very important issue facing the United States, with many Republican members of Congress opposing the FCC’s Open Internet Order and the reclassifying of broadband to Telecommunication Services from Information Services. The members of the GOP who are completely against the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) reclassification, and attempts to keep the internet free, give many reasons that are simply not true, such as the FCC’s regulations will destroy the free nature of the internet. Because of the attempts by Congressmen with the GOP to fight the regulations, many Americans, especially small business owners that use the web as a base, feel that their equality and freedoms on the internet will be

Net neutrality is becoming a rising topic that could take the large community of internet users by storm. Net neutrality according to Dictionary.com is: "The principle that basic Internet protocols should be non-discriminatory." This definition by itself is very bland and leaves out many important details. I agree whole-heartedly with this idea of a truly open internet. Nobody questioned the free internet until on January 14th, 2014, a federal court of appeals opposed the Federal Communications Commission or F.C.C's "Open Internet Order." This allowed for large internet companies, such as AT&T or Comcast to discriminate against content displayed on the internet. This change could end up costing users a lot more out of their

Net neutrality is a set of rules designed to make Internet service providers treat all web traffic the same, no matter the source. Its defenders say these regulations are at the heart of the idea that the Internet without interference by broadband providers.

With over a billion users the internet is one of the most used services in the world. However, this vast idea, that gives one so much freedom, is slowly loosing its value. The article "Point/Counterpoint: Network Neutrality Nuances” by Barbara van Schewick is a brilliant writing with minor flaws to explain this issue. While, Schewick introduces the idea of Network Neutrality well and keeps the flow of the article consistent, she uses too many unnecessary examples to portray a point.

Ever since the internet was made mainstream in 1993 with the launch of the NCSA Mosaic GUI Browsers, it has become an ever increasing necessity in the government, businesses, and at home. As the internet became more normalized, ISPs, or Internet Service Providers, gained momentum and became what we know today as Comcast, AT&T, Verizon, etc. Now that the internet is sourced from just a few major corporations, they are trying to restrict internet usage behind a paywall, stealing money from customers unnecessarily.

Along with consumer advocates and human rights organization, many internet application companies like Yahoo, Amazon, eBay, Vonage etc. support net neutrality regulation. Google published a statement in 2008, opposing market power of broadband providers to control access to content and other applications. They further compared the situation to that of the telecommunication market, where companies are not allowed to control who their customers call or what those customers are allowed to say. The Sites which favor net neutrality propose to have an equal platform for every content on the Internet, in short they demand ’Open Internet.Net neutrality is a highly important component for open internet. The idea of an open internet reflects that anyone

Net Neutrality says, “Okay so you have already paid x amount of dollars. Have a nice day! Enjoy your internet!”

How many people have a smartphone? How many people use any source of social media? (snapchat, instagram, facebook...ect) Would you still use these medias if you had to pay for them? How much would you be willing to spend on these? Social media is something more than 75% of americans use everyday.

Nowadays, people’s lives are closely tided with Internet, and I would like to talk about the concept Net Neutrality today. In a simple phrase, net neutrality means ISP (internet service providers) and government that regulate the Internet should treat all data equally, without discrimination or setting up any hierarchy that charging differentially. However, there are some violations: some Internet service providers have discrimination by protocol, which means favoring or blocking information based on the type of communications protocol/ transmission package that computers are using to communicate. For instance, American company Comcast was found out that they inhibited people to use high-speed Internet service in file-sharing software called

“Congress shall make no law...abridging the freedom of speech” (Constitution, 1st amendment). This is something major to everybody; because if a human's freedom of speech is taken away they are no longer human. This is because, for one they can not express emotions and second because they cannot describe anything or go anywhere. That is what the Federal Communication commission (FCC) is getting rid of. Are rights to a free and open internet, which is called Net Neutrality. The basic principle of getting rid of Net Neutrality is that your internet providers can and will make you pay extra for a “fast lane” in which everything loads faster. Without these rights to the open internet, we would not be able to express your feelings, will not be able to access information easily, much harder to access entertainment, and we would very persuaded pay more for it if you want to receive your information much faster.

The emergence of the Internet and the World Wide Web brought upon a medium of communication with a range of opportunities for the world. However, this medium is, in due course, subject to the control of a few major companies. The enigma of information flow is the central concern of net neutrality. Consumers, competition and network owners would benefit directly from the regulation of network neutrality because it would provide a positive impact to those parties as well as provide equality.