Is Net Neutrality Worth Trying to Save?
Late last month, the Federal Communications Commission published a rule that reverses long-standing protections of the Internet known as “Net Neutrality.”
It’s not a done deal yet. Congress has another 40-plus days to overturn the rule. The problem for lawmakers who wish to overturn it is they are outnumbered by those in favor of it.
As of this writing, only one Republican Senator – Susan Collins of Maine – has promised to vote with Democrats against the rule.
Those in favor of maintaining Net Neutrality are painting this debate as corporate America versus American citizens. Is that an accurate portrayal? First let’s look at both sides of the issue.
The Argument for Net Neutrality
Those in favor of Net Neutrality see it as a principle that prohibits Internet service providers such as Comcast, AT&T and Verizon from speeding up, slowing down or blocking any content, applications or websites an Internet browser may wish to access.
They say Net Neutrality preserves the right to communicate freely online, and that it protects free speech.
They claim that without Net Neutrality, those Internet service providers will be able to call all the shots. They’ll be able to decide which websites, content and applications succeed and which ones fail.
Without Net Neutrality, they say those providers will be free to slow down competitors’ content and block political opinions with which they disagree.
And, they’ll be free to charge companies fees to receive preferential treatment, pushing others to slower access.
In addition to individuals, small businesses will suffer without Net Neutrality, it is predicted. Those businesses rely on an open Internet to start their businesses, create markets, advertise their products and services, and reach customers.
Without Net Neutrality, Internet service providers will be able to use their powers to change the Internet’s level playing field. They’ll be able to provide “home field advantage” to larger companies with pockets deep enough to pay for special privileges.
The Argument Against Net Neutrality
Not everyone who is skeptical of the motives of large corporations such as Comcast, AT&T and Verizon is in favor of Net Neutrality.
Josh Steimle, owner of the digital marketing firm MWI, believes Net Neutrality will give the U.S. government control over the Internet. He says this will be worse than having a variety of Internet service providers controlling it.
As a result, he believes Net Neutrality will actually result in less competition, less privacy and less freedom. He wants to see Internet control left to the free market.
“If we choose politicians, we will see the Internet become another mismanaged public monopoly, subject to political whims and increased scrutiny from our friends at the NSA,” Steimle wrote as a Forbes contributor.
“If we leave it up to the free market, we will, in time, receive more of what we want at a lower price. It may not be a perfect process, but it will be better than the alternative.”
Others against Net Neutrality say it’s not all it’s cracked up to be. They say that even if the Internet is treated like a utility – such as water or electric – providers would still be able to establish tiered pricing for better Internet speeds and services. And this would defeat the very purpose of Net Neutrality.
FCC Chairman Ajit Pai says that abolishing Net Neutrality would lead to more investment in the Internet service provider sector. That would allow those providers to create new services, which would translate into more competition. And the end result would be that the user will benefit.
What Do You Think?
On the surface, Net Neutrality seems to be all about granting us the freedom to access whatever information we want from the Internet without big corporations controlling our Internet experiences.
Digging deeper, some folks are outspoken about the importance of keeping the U.S. government from controlling the Internet. They believe leaving control in the hands of the free market is the only way to keep the Internet truly free.
I would love to hear what you think. How do you feel about Net Neutrality, and is it worth fighting to save?
One more thing…
Regardless of which camp you are in, I thought you’d enjoy this humorous video that makes a parallel between Net Neutrality and trying to buy a Whopper at Burger King:
Iam against Net Neutrality now and when they called it Internet Code.
I am also against the Patriot ACT, a Law passed in 2001 that is approved each year. Senators add new language each year for their crazy wants and from their StateHouse. I do not want this for America. Infringement on our right to be free is being stripped away every year. Language is changed every year with no explanation how law is to be interpreted. #2, how many times have you gotten so made, your yelling epithets out of your mouth finally in a moment of complete frustration or intimidation you say to the other person; I am going to kill you!
You know and I know you are not going to actually kill him but the other person doesn’t know. So he calls 911, police come, he tells the police officer what you said to him and now he is frightened for his family. The Police Officer hears from the neighbors that you said it. The police officer slaps the cuffs on you and charges you with “Terrorism” under the Patriots Act.
So cloak yourself in the flag and Constitution while Now I will pretend to be your father. Talking to judge’s, DA’s, FBI, CIA and they tell me, NO they do not need you anything. n my Freedom or ever. Are you aware you can be held prisoner and the government can deny they have you locked up? It would take only one sentence to be written into this law that would crush the second amendment. The Republicans wrote this law, passed it, and Bush signed it into law. The liberals hate this law, the moment they realize they can change the law gun owners you and the second amendment, we disinherit the right to bear arms.
Net Neutrality is another Obama scam. From the Party of the Big Lie. Just like was already stated, like the “Affordable Care Act” gave use an average of 35% annual health insurance rate increases, and fewer people with health insurance every year. The idea that government can take private property from its owners without justly compensating them in order to make things more “fair” for the “little people” is no different from communism, which has murdered more people than every other thing in history but old age. As someone who has watched the internet develop since the early 1980’s, I know exactly what comrade Obama was trying to get away with, and it is obscene.
I am totally against net neutrality!!! As a frequent user of websites for information, I see this as a violation to our first amendment rights!
That presentation makes no sense. Why should heavy users (movies, gaming) be subsidized by people like me? (Email, shopping and some web browsing?) Pay for what you use and quit slowing down my activity. No NN.
HaHa! A funny video trying to explain Net Nutrality with a Whopper! What they don’t explain in the video is that since Burger King is controlling access to the Whopper in order to make more money from those who will pay it, some competitor will undercut Burger King to provide a better burger at a cheaper price and Burger King will either change or die from selling 2-3 $26 burgers a day and watching all their customers go elsewhere to eat. The same goes for internet service providers now that Net Nutrality has been cancelled and the Government no longer controls the internet. It’s called Free Market baby, Competition!, Capitalism at its finest!😎👍 Elon Musk is already using Space X to launch LEO satellites that will provide internet service to every square inch of the entire surface of planet earth. Do you honestly feel that this will drive the cost of internet access up?
After reading this article I truthfully am divided on “net neutrality”. On the one hand allowing the big corps free reign to charge what they want is not good. On the other hand if the government is to in charge what’s to keep them from emulating what China is doing, i.e. censoring what we can post.
Both big business and big government bad. Net will be controlled no matter what. This could get ugly fast. Get those bug-out bags ready, get addresses and phone numbers of valued contacts, and hope someone with integrity comes forward with a solution.
We need net neutrality in order to keep the internet accessible to everyone equally at the same cost and same speed along with free speech. We do not want big business or government to control the net. It belongs to the people!
Say no to net Neutrality. What we need is an Internet Bill of Rights! #IBOR. Anything that the big companies readily agree upon is, at the least, suspect.
I’m against net neutrality; I want FREEDOM!
AT&T already slows down my access. I already immediately receive ads for things I look at on the web. I want the government to enforce net neutrality. I want my free speech and access to info.
Big brother will always protect you
LOL
I think there is only one reason AT&T-Comcast and other major Corporations who wish to stay anonymous are trying to do away with Net Neutrality is so they can decide what can or can not view and only at the right price. Its about Money!
The very first sentence is a lie! Net neutrality is not long-standing protection of the Internet. Check the date Net Neutrality was first passed and you will find that it was another of Obama’s bright ideas to give the government more control.
Net Neutrality is a Con aimed at giving the government power over the Internet. As history has shown us repeatedly, the government is incapable of running anything. Thank God it failed, just like Obamacare.
I think the whopper video was off the mark. Every ISP I have ever had since the 80’s have charged more for faster internet speed. If the neutrality BS was correct all of my ISP’s customers would get the 100 meg service for the same price.
Unfortunately, other than in major urban areas, Internet service, like water or power, is a monopoly. In other words, there is no “free market” where you can choose a competing product if you don’t like your current service. Once established, it is very difficult for an independent provider to enter such a market to compete, as the cost to build a duplicate infrastructure is cost prohibitive. This is why utilities are regulated. Otherwise, such anti-competitive monopolies would be free to charge whatever they wanted and minimize quality of service. Years ago, when several competing long distance carriers entered the phone market, rules were changed to force the traditional phone companies to interconnect with the competing services to create a “free market” environment, a situation similar to the way current net neutrality legislation creates a level playing field for Internet services. In exchange for allowing a selection of phone providers, legislation regulating phone companies as utilities was lessened for areas where consumers were able to make a choice. There are currently at least two companies working on launching constellations of low earth orbit satellites to blanket the entire US with competitive services. I believe once this happens that net neutrality rules can be retired as a true “free marketplace” will exist for Internet users. Until then, most users will effectively be dealing with a monopoly, and in these areas, net neutrality rules must be preserved.
“Net Neutrality” sounds like a fair deal. It isn’t.
Kat and Charlene are right. Government control would create a monster for regulating the net, taxing it, telling AT&T, Spectrum, etc. what they could charge, what programming they had to run and who could and couldn’t get on the internet.
Conversely, if AT&T, Spectrum, etc. played games with speed, cost of service, anyone could start a service for less money, faster speed, freer access and so on. That’s the free market at work.
What the Burger King spot didn’t show was all those folks going to Mickey Ds or Whataburger or ?? . Too bad there wasn’t an opposing “spot” for the other side.
Not so if the government controlled it.
Let the FCC keep the internet open to all.
If you believe that repealing net neutrality is good for the internet, I have a bridge I want to sell you. It will allow the ISP’s to decide what you can access at “normal” internet speeds. As an example, company a has a product that company b also has. Your ISP is affiliated with company a. Without net neutrality your access to company b could be basically slowed so low that it becomes unusable because company a wants you to use their product. Of course, company a claims that this will not happen. Just remember that bridge that I have for sale when you are trying to get to the other companies web site for a similar product.
Obama’s net neutrality was sounded good to most fair people. What they didn’t understand was that under Title II of the Communications Act the internet would/was classified as a public utility. A utility is subject to regulation, taxes, licensing, etc. All of this poses a real and obvious threat to the future of free speech and entertainment.
Burger Video is a poor example of net neutrality. Should use MacD next to BKing, offering their top of the line burgers at competitive prices.
Net Nuetrality is SOROS/CIA/NSA BS! NAME is Misleading, like Obamas, “Affordable Act!” DONT DO NN!!!!
Net Neutrality is like censorship; do you really want your internet access limited, directed and controlled by Comcast, AT & T, or Other major corporations? I certainly do not…
I’d rather have a private company in charge of content speed, etc., than handing it over to the government. We all know how “efficient” the government is when it comes to providing goods and services to consumers. Too bad you younger folks out there haven’t experienced the impenetrable jungle of government-imposed idiot regulations that deny older Americans like me timely access to medical care and supplies through the Medicare bureaucracy. You would decide pretty fast that private entities(i.e.-doctors and suppliers of necessary medicines and equipment) are much better qualified to provide necessary services than a bunch of clueless federal bureaucrats.
The government is already too big in our business. I value my free speech!!! If for example THEY decided to limit your interprise in favor of other survival foods company’s because their”friend” owned them I would be very angry that I lost my access to you and your wonderful company. They ability for me to have a choice could be taken away. And that is scary.
We need Net Neutrality to protect net users from the big providers. Save Net Neutrality!!! Save Net Neutrality!!! Save Net Neutrality!!!