Net Neutrality: Contrasting and Opposing Views

According to the American Library Association net neutrality is defined as the principle that Internet Service Providers (ISPs) should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or blocking particular products or websites. So, with this principle Internet Service Providers can not restrict, impair or degrade any network speed or traffic on the foundation of content , application, services or mobile devices. For example, Netflix, YouTube, Hulu all do the same exact thing so with the net neutrality principle put in place Netflix cannot interfere with any of the company's internet traffic by favoring their source and company and limiting access to the others.

If they were to do that it would be stopping the free flow of information and would basically disrupt the rights of the individual to be able to participate in public discourse and the full functioning of a library. Basically, net neutrality is the federal government, along with the FCC, stepping in and regulating the price that the internet service provider can charge companies for sending data over the internet. Just like any other limited resource the laws of supply and demand and the fair market would determine the price of the commodity. Scott Cleland from Net Competition said that net neutrality legislations mean less privacy for all Americans, as Net neutrality would require more government monitoring and surveillance of Internet traffic.

The principle of net neutrality can be compared to the way you would use electricity in your home. You do not pay your power company a blender fee just so you can plug in your blender , or a light bulb fee just so you can turn on your lights (Gordon; Ammori). Likewise, net neutrality states that ISP's cannot charge for the privilege to use specific programs or services (Ammori). Scott Cleland and Net Competition argue that Americans would suffer a loss of privacy. So, if net neutrality was not in place the government will have to start looking a bit closer at network traffic, in order to enforce a neutral internet.

Contrasting and/or opposing views

Pro-Net Neutrality

Most consumers who are pro- net neutrality argue that all data should be treated equally in terms of pricing and access and that providers shouldn't have a say over what content passes through their company. They also argue that Net Neutrality places us in a world where a phone company could very well degrade or interfere with your connection if they do not approve of the person you are calling. Although it may seem impossible because of the principle of net neutrality is in place, but it is very well possible.
In terms of resources, the pro-Net Neutrality crowd argues its elimination stifles innovation and stops small businesses and startups from obtaining an equal position with larger companies which have more resources. In a pro- Net Neutrality world, it's conceivable internet providers could offer upgrade speeds and broader access to companies that have the resources to pay for faster delivery which in the end would stifle access for smaller businesses.

Anti-Net Neutrality

However, those consumers against Net Neutrality argue that things have changed since the early days of the internet which is very true because the internet has expand. Eventually as time went on there are companies like Netflix and YouTube who required a large amount of bandwidth to provide their service. There are file sharing services consuming huge embrace of bandwidth to provide millions of downloads of free software, movies and music. With this in mind there are the Googles and the Skypes of the world that offer bandwidth-consuming free phone services. According to Forbes.com net neutrality naysayers argue that content providers and consumers should pay their fair share pointing out that those entities that use vast quantities of bandwidth shouldn't get away with paying the same access fees as a website with 15 visitors a month.

For ISP's who are anti-Net Neutrality, suppress takes on a different meaning., They argue that Net Neutrality suppressed innovation because it did not allow for the small or big businesses potential to increase in revenue from higher data consuming companies which would, in time, provide the necessary revenue to offer better and new kinds of internet services.

Pros of Net Neutrality

Net Neutrality is a very controversial topic because there are an equal number of pros and cons. Here are some reasons why net neutrality is a good idea. First it creates an equal playing field which means with this principle in place Internet Service Providers (ISP's) only have a little say on what passes through the mechanisms that are used by customers to access the internet. However, there are controls in place for illegal activity but companies like T- Mobile and Direct Tv have no right to change how their data package is delivered to them. Second it protects innovation, so this means each company big or small were able to start at the same level in fact big companies still have the same access as small businesses or freelancers, which then gives them an acceptable earning to live off of comfortably. Third it gives the customer the freedom of expression. This is good because it gives various of websites the right to operate legally and there isn't any censorship as long as they meet their legal obligation. Lastly illegal activities will still be monitored reason for this because with net neutrality put in place it still gives the government and the FCC a way to still protect the consumer.

Cons of Net Neutrality

Equally important just as there are pros to any given situation there are always cons as well. Here are few examples of what not having net neutrality can do. First one is the enormous amounts of data are consumed without compensation. Second one is reduced income from internet uses limits infrastructure. So, if net neutrality were to be removed these high-level consumers would be asked to pay more for what they consume. There are so many cons to this topic because it affects a lot more than just companies it also affects college students. As a college student we only get a certain amount of money from the government to go to school. So, there for we cannot afford to sit here and pay for the internet something that is supposed to be free and open for everyone to use for their own usage. A few other examples are free internet access will go away which means no college student can go on the internet freely to do any homework assignments or tasks given by the teacher lastly more regulations would also create slower access which is a bad thing for any college students who take online classes or who even just uses it for class because it will prevent them from getting their work done and hinder them academically.

Analysis of views

College students being able to have access to the internet is extremely important .Without it we could not study for class , do any academic research or even just use it for general usage. Unrestrained access to the internet is also very important to students who do take home assignments and use their own internet access. Of course, without a neutrality rule put in place students will feel the impact because it would cause complications for students who need to use the internet on a daily basis. In addition, most college students who already have a horrible connection at home could be strongly impacted by net neutrality getting repealed. If it is repealed it could hinder the student's ability to be able to complete simple assignment tasks such as taking a test, studying for an exam or turning in any assignments online.

Proposed Issue Resolution

With doing this topic you began to realize they are both wanting the same thing just in different ways. Never have they once took the time out to really put their selves in the consumers shoes or the ISP's shoes because they feel like they matter. With ever websites I have looked at I have yet to see any facts laid out on the page, in fact everything I seen were just opinons on how the other feels about net Neutrality. I can give you a clear example of what I am saying, take the iPhone and Galaxy phones many people in the world have their opinons on each phone by themselves. But that's all they are just opinons their trying to find a way to persuade you to get whichever phone it's the same thing with pro and anti-Net neutrality they are just trying to get the government and or consumers to join their side in order for their side to seem more favorable.

Cite this page