The Importance Of The Internet On The Internet

Attention Getter: When you go online you have certain expectations. You expect to be connected to whatever website you want. You expect that your cable or phone company isn’t messing with the data and is connecting you to all websites, applications and content you choose. You expect to be in control of your internet experience. When you use the internet you expect Net Neutrality.

"The government has no right monitor our internet use and social media accounts. Net neutrality is “The principle that the internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular products or websites” . If Net neutrality is repealed ten internet providers will be able to limit our access to things. Net neutrality lets people express their voices online . Sources that we once had for free would have to be paid for like Youtube, instagram and many more.

Furthermore, without net neutrality, “Comcast has the potential to slow up or speed down certain internet content, it could slow down ABC content while boosting the speed of NBC content” (“The Case for Net Neutrality”). In the absence of net neutrality, big companies can control the internet speeds based on bias. Seeing as companies such as Comcast have the ability to speed up or slow down specific content without net neutrality, the general public is not receiving equal access to all content. Under net neutrality, major companies controlling Internet speeds would be forbidden, ensuring the equal access the general public currently receives would be protected. To add on, the debate on net neutrality will determine if the general public will be victims to ISPs unfair and dangerous regulations. “The [situation] outcomes appear to give ISPs dangerous and unfair control over the internet, especially considering the role of the internet in [the general public’s] daily lives” (“The Case for Net Neutrality”). Lacking net neutrality, ISPs can control the Internet in unfair ways, greatly impacting the general public’s

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

The internet is an immense part of everyone’s lives, whether it’s used for work, school, or entertainment and it’s at risk. The federal communications commission (FCC) is planning to end net neutrality, which is a big deal. Net neutrality or open internet is the principle of having free, equal access to the internet, without having to pay or have internet service providers blocking and slowing down websites. For many years, people have been fighting to keep the internet free, and big companies and the FCC have been fighting back. Fighting to keep net neutrality has never been more important than now because the vote to end net neutrality is on December. 14. Fighting to keep net neutrality is important because it allows free access to information, free speech and thought, and it helps businesses.

Back in 2006, Aaron Weiss, a technology writer and web developer, noted that, “The real fight over network neutrality isn’t between the telecoms and their end users—it’s with the major content providers, who now hold the largest bankrolls” (Weiss 25). Today, that is truer than ever. Content providers that have become immensely popular over the last decade, like Netflix and Google, want immunity from bandwidth restrictions and fees, because users want fast accessibility to these sites. The idea of no bandwidth restrictions is appealing to them because when they “can charge consumers directly, the only regulation that results in a change in their payoffs is strong net neutrality. Thus, moving from any other regime to strong net neutrality, increases the profits of the content provider that attracts consumer attention…By contrast, in the absence of strong net neutrality, that marginal surplus is appropriated by the ISP” (Gans

With the thought of American citizens being in control of their lives still in mind, it seems that the government is truly trying to tell its citizens how to live, since the repeal of internet neutrality would affect the free market system in negative ways; as a result, people’s financial lives would also be affected in negative ways. For example, according to page 15 of Alan Joch’s article, “Debating Net Neutrality,” internet service providers could do something similar as companies like Google in which they can charge advertisers to show certain results when a person looks up something similar to their focus. If net neutrality does come to an end, then situations like that will indeed happen. Therefore, net neutrality needs to be maintained because those situations would disrupt the economic system and the supposed fairness that is guaranteed by it. It would allow for the wealthier companies to further present their services and leave the smaller competitors in the dark. And, because internet neutrality’s repeal would allow internet providers and the government to essentially spy on everyone, “Various types of analytical applications could give broadband providers an efficient way to slice and dice their customers’ usage data, and thus gives ISPs an opportunity to argue that they’re able to place ads as precisely tuned to individual users’ interests as those inserted by search companies” (Joch 15). That statement further proves as to why ending net neutrality is a bad idea. It shows that not only will the government and the wealthy business people that run the internet know what everyone is doing, but it also shows how they would practically control the economy by choosing whether they want to show certain business’s ads or not. And, what is even worse is that they will have control of what is seen, and they can claim that the results they show are unique to the person and what they have looked up, which essentially leaves smaller competitors without hope. Now, according to Timothy J. Tardiff, in his article, “NET NEUTRALITY: ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF MARKET DEVELOPMENTS,” the end of internet neutrality would be a positive thing because people would have the option to pay for better options or services when it

" The United States government has a responsibility to ensure that every American has access to an internet that has a freedom of information. The internet has become a necessity in our everyday lives. School age Americans use the internet for research projects and even to submit homework. A vast majority of working-age Americans use the internet for the jobs or are involved in producing the inputs necessary to advance technology and keeping the current technology infrastructure working. The U.S. government has a limited duty in monitoring internet content. The government should have the ability to protect Americans from cyber acts and personal information theft. Currently the Federal Trade Commission has the power to regulate the internet

(Statement and rebuttal) On November, 21 2017, the F.C.C (Federal Communication Commision) approved a plan made by the F.C.C. Chairman Ajit Pai. His plan consisted in repealing net neutrality to make the internet a safe and better place. Net neutrality is a principle that states that every app, website, and platform should be treated equally. Since the F.C.C. approved this plan, people have been worried about what is going to happen to the internet. People is worried because when the F.C.C. repealed net neutrality they also repealed all the rules that were part of it. Those rules avoided ISP (Internet Service Providers) of blocking, and throttling of every website, app, and platform, but there is something that people doesn’t know. Most of

Your internet experience is in jeopardy and it’s up to you to prevent it. Net Neutrality is the principle that regulates internet service providers like Verizon, AT&T, and Comcast from charging consumers a higher price for faster connection to their content. Net neutrality allows access to the internet on to all consumers equally. When it comes to the internet and browsing, the speed at which your information loads is important. Viewing a video on Instagram, Facebook or YouTube, which takes 5 minutes to load can be frustrating to the viewer. However, more consumers would connect to a server where they may view a video that only takes 5 seconds to load.

Over 280 million people could have something really unique changed from their lives and not even be aware of it (United States Internet Users, n.d.). Internet users in the United States are faced with a problem that could change the Internet as they know it. As Eric Schmidt (2006) CEO of Google puts it “Creativity, innovation and a free and open marketplace are all at stake in this fight." This is because Net neutrality is at risk from Internet service providers who want the ability to charge for what they call a “fast lane” on the Internet and the FCC is making it possible for this to happen. Net neutrality is the principle which states that no bit of information should be prioritized over another and that Internet service providers, or ISPs, are to be completely detached from what information is

Yet at the same time, these two sets of companies compete for customers, creating a glaring conflict of interest. Whilst these issues seemed to be resolved by the middle of the twentieth century, the advent of the internet introduced a whole new set of problems. The term net neutrality, first coined by Tim Wu, Professor of the Columbia University Law School in 2003, came to represent a question that had long been perceived as being of relatively little concern – is unfettered access to the internet a right, or a privilege? (Cheng and Bandyopadhay 2011: 60) (Greenstein 2007: 61, 85) The debate around internet regulation and net neutrality first gained traction in 2002, when the United States Federal Communications Commission (FCC) controversially ruled that broadband internet was to be classed as an information service rather as a telecommunications service, and thus made it exempt from a considerable range of content and conduct regulations that it would otherwise have been subject to. For those Americans, as exemplified by organizations such as the Electronic Frontier Foundation, who saw the internet as a space of uninhibited free expression that needed to be protected from the influence of corporate meddling, this decision was very frustrating. As promoted by Wu and others, net neutrality came to represent the belief that ‘internet data packets should move nondiscriminatorily’ – that is, the data (‘packets’ essentially being a technical

Throughout the last decade, the idea of Net Neutrality has been the topic of many debates. Net Neutrality is the idea that Internet service providers should not be allowed to block their users from any content regardless of its source. The Debate is still continuing in 2017 with the F.C.C planning to repeal Net Neutrality and allow internet providers to completely regulate what their users can see and charge the users extra for “luxuries” such as social media, messaging, email, and music. There are two sides of this argument, one side believes that Net Neutrality should be taken away, while others believe that it is unfair for the Internet providers to have the right to take away the access to any content. Internet providers should not be allowed to control what content one can view when surfing the internet.

These days the internet has become an essential part to living for almost everyone but one of the controversial topics that people bring up is that whether or not the government should regulate information on the internet. Both sides have valid points which form a reasonable argument. Some people would say that they need to because of the dangers lurking around in the cyber world but the reasons for why the government shouldn’t regulate the Internet outnumber the reasons for why they should. The federal government should not regulate or censor information on the internet because doing so violates the first amendment and citizen’s right to privacy, degrades the educational value of the web, prevents the promotion and facilitation of

Every American citizen is granted with certain rights that are protected by the very documents that helped establish this country. Those documents mention freedom of religion, freedom of speech, and freedom of the press. Although these freedoms are recognized as being dearly important, the government appears to be wanting to limit them in a very devious way by wanting to “improve” the internet through ending something known as internet neutrality. Internet neutrality prevents the government and corporations from allowing restrictions on the internet, so internet neutrality is necessary to maintain internet freedom, prevent an all-controlling government, and prevent the regulation of the internet from affecting the free market system. To many, internet neutrality may sound like something bad at first glance, but net neutrality is actually something positive once it is further looked into.