Net Neutrality Affecting Libraries
Opposition of Net Neutrality With as many parties that are in favor of net neutrality, there are an equal number who are against it. While net neutrality regulations allow for open, unrestricted access to the internet, it could also be said that restriction is an option that needs to be allowed to Internet service providers in order for them to recoup initial investments costs if they deem it necessary. It’s also a valid point that because there has been limited government oversight since the mid 1990s, that the internet has become what it is today because of the private sector and the investment and advancements the made to the industry. Many are concerned that with government oversight at this point in the game, can limit the forward progress
…show more content…
of the telecommunications industry. One individual who has been opposed to net neutrality is Ajit Pai, one of the five FCC Commissioners. Mr. Pai states that within the past twenty years, the Internet was able to flourish and develop into what it is today, because the government decided to take a back seat and allow the private sector to investment in the development and ultimately lead where the industry has gone. By allowing the private sector to take control, has ultimately made the internet far better than what the government could have foreseen. Another argument against net neutrality made by Mr. Pai, is that with more government oversight would allow the government to state where future investments can go, which can ultimately harm Internet service providers.
“ It seized (FCC) unilateral authority to regulate Internet conduct, to direct where Internet service providers put their investments, and to determine what service plans will be available to the American Public. This was a radical departure from the bipartisan, market-oriented policies that served us so well for the last two decades.” (Pai, 2015)
Also, by changing how the market is regulated, 20 years after the market began, can cause detrimental effect to the industry. Another individual who is opposed to net neutrality regulations is Dennis Weisman. Mr. Weisman is a professor of economics at Kansas State University. He argues that “the FCC has yet to establish that the regulatory oversight it proposes would not stifle more investment than in stimulates.” (Weisman, 2015). Since the mid 1990s, the private sector has been the one to investment in the physical expansion of laying cables and connecting homes and businesses to the internet. This has added hundreds of thousands of jobs to the telecommunications industry. One would need to hire service technicians, customer service representation, managers, and various other positions that make a telecommunications company work on a daily basis. These additional jobs have caused the economy to develop and grow. With government oversight into the industry, the amount of investment by the private sector would be stifling. This could in turn cause job loss and the economy to take a down turn. The economy has finally recovered from the downturn in the late 2000s; a downturn of the telecommunications industry, would be harmful to the still fragile economy. Weisman also argues that “the lack of of economic foundation to justify broadband regulation, promises to make this though sledding for the FCC.” (Weisman, 2015). While there is reasonable justification for net neutrality regulations, an economic justification has yet to be provided. While many supporters of net neutrality state that Internet service providers, charge fees for paid prioritization or even ‘fast lane’ internet, in an article written by Peter Gregory states “Even though ISPs have been able to do this for most of the time since the internet began, instances of it occurring have been incredibly rare.” Government interference into an otherwise free market, can severely impact the industry, just for a few instances of a few companies unethically charging inflated prices.
John Thune, a U.S. senator from South Dakota and also chairman of the Committee of Commerce, Science, and Transpiration, also agree that reclassify the Internet from an information service to a Title II utility will severely hinder the forward progress and the accessibility of the Internet. During a committee meeting on March 18, 2015, Mr Thune remarked:
“The tech and telecom industries agree on few regulatory matters, but there was one idea that unified them for nearly two decades: the Internet is not the telephone network and you cannot apply the old rules of telecom to the new world of the Internet. Three weeks ago, three regulators turned their backs on that consensus, and I believe the Internet and its users will ultimately suffer for it.” (U.S. Government, 2015)
Net Neutrality & Libraries Net neutrality is becoming an increasingly common concern for libraries.
Many libraries have within their mission statement a write-up, among other things, about being able to provide access to information for their patrons (Bangert, 2006). While fifty years ago information meant access to books, newspaper, magazines, and periodicals. In today’s society that also means access to the internet. Libraries are a central hub of information and resources to their communities. But what happens when the accessibility of one of those resources become compromised?
How These Changes Are Affecting Libraries One way in net neutrality is affecting libraries is in the ability to provide unbiased, unrestricted access to resources on the Internet. Sara White of the Pratt Institute School of Library and Information Science stated “This issue is one that librarians should take notice of, as it potentially affects abilities of users to exercise intellectual freedoms and could impact the library’s ability to provide services to its users.” (White, 2014). One of the core missions of the library is to provide access to information. However, if and/or when that ability is affected, libraries are at the forefront to champion for net neutrality …show more content…
regulations. With the reclassification of the Internet to a Title II Utility, many within the library field are rejoicing. Former ALA president Courtney Young stated “The FCC vote in favor of strong, enforceable net neutrality rules is a win for students, creators, researchers, and learners of all ages.” (Enis, 2015). While libraries may not experience changes to the level of streaming content from their Internet service providers, it does not mean the fight should be given up. Net Neutrality is a constant battle that will wage for the foreseeable future.
How These Changes Will Change the Future of the Library Net Neutrality has been a part of the history of the library and will also be a part of the future.
Ideas on How to Negate the Issue There have been considerable controversy and debate surrounding net neutrality. When the Internet became commercially available in the mid 1990s, the FCC classified the Internet as an information service. This allowed for the private sector to build the physical infrastructure of connecting homes, businesses, and governments to the internet. The private sector also elevated and advanced the technology involved to what it is today. However, Internet service providers have also been found of violating ethical issues in regards to paid prioritization and data throttle. They have slowed the data speed of web content, until the content providers could afford to pay to prioritize their data. However, without the investment of the private sector, the internet would not be what it is today. The private sector is also afraid that government intervention would lower investments and subsequently various inventions that are necessary to the forward progress of technology. Is there a way to appease both sides of the debate?
Create a Legislative Outcome That Is Fair To All Parties When discussing legislative outcomes that could be beneficial to both sides of the net neutrality debate, it is important to advise, these suggestions are curtailed to the United States.
While the Internet is a global presence, however, there is currently no official global governance in place to regulate the Internet. One way to embrace net neutrality regulations, but also respect the investment of the private sector, is creating a legislative outcome that could potentially be beneficial to both parties. The purpose of net neutrality is not to squash innovation, but to eliminate content discrimination by Internet service providers. One potential way to appease both sides, is to allow the private sector to remain an invested member in shaping the forward progress of the internet. This will allow the private sector to determine which areas of progress to develop and enhance. They could determine to invest heavily in fiber optics or even expanding to underdeveloped areas. By allowing the private sector to determine for themselves, helps the telecommunications industry as a whole. At the same time, enforce rules in which paid prioritization, data throttling, and data discrimination are illegal. By regulating the industry to remain fair and neutral, while at the same time allowing the telecommunications industry to determine the future, may provide the best outcome for both parties. While some in the private sector are
hesitant to government oversight in any capacity, it is necessary to remember that government regulation does not crush innovation.
Allow the Internet to Become Self-Regulated The Internet is not one thing in specific. Instead it is many different parts, working independently and at the same time in tandem to provide a resource that has quickly become a staple in everyday life. Another solution would allow complete removal of government regulation. By removing government oversight would allow the telecommunications industry to become self-regulated. Self-regulation would force Internet service providers to compete with each other in order to maintain and obtain consumers. This removal of regulation, would allow the government to allocate the resources to other governmental departments. Internet service providers have been able to slow or block web content since the very beginning. However, these instances are very few and very far between. “The American Civil Liberties Union, an enthusiastic supporter of net neutrality, lists only four incidents, none of which have happened since 2007.” (Gregory, 2015). So while one of the arguments for net neutral is based on internet service providers limiting access to web content, these cases are extremely rare. With past growth and expansion to the internet, indicates that internet service providers are able to adequately self-regulate.
of the telecommunications industry. One individual who has been opposed to net neutrality is Ajit Pai, one of the five FCC Commissioners. Mr. Pai states that within the past twenty years, the Internet was able to flourish and develop into what it is today, because the government decided to take a back seat and allow the private sector to investment in the development and ultimately lead where the industry has gone. By allowing the private sector to take control, has ultimately made the internet far better than what the government could have foreseen. Another argument against net neutrality made by Mr. Pai, is that with more government oversight would allow the government to state where future investments can go, which can ultimately harm Internet service providers.
“ It seized (FCC) unilateral authority to regulate Internet conduct, to direct where Internet service providers put their investments, and to determine what service plans will be available to the American Public. This was a radical departure from the bipartisan, market-oriented policies that served us so well for the last two decades.” (Pai, 2015)
Also, by changing how the market is regulated, 20 years after the market began, can cause detrimental effect to the industry. Another individual who is opposed to net neutrality regulations is Dennis Weisman. Mr. Weisman is a professor of economics at Kansas State University. He argues that “the FCC has yet to establish that the regulatory oversight it proposes would not stifle more investment than in stimulates.” (Weisman, 2015). Since the mid 1990s, the private sector has been the one to investment in the physical expansion of laying cables and connecting homes and businesses to the internet. This has added hundreds of thousands of jobs to the telecommunications industry. One would need to hire service technicians, customer service representation, managers, and various other positions that make a telecommunications company work on a daily basis. These additional jobs have caused the economy to develop and grow. With government oversight into the industry, the amount of investment by the private sector would be stifling. This could in turn cause job loss and the economy to take a down turn. The economy has finally recovered from the downturn in the late 2000s; a downturn of the telecommunications industry, would be harmful to the still fragile economy. Weisman also argues that “the lack of of economic foundation to justify broadband regulation, promises to make this though sledding for the FCC.” (Weisman, 2015). While there is reasonable justification for net neutrality regulations, an economic justification has yet to be provided. While many supporters of net neutrality state that Internet service providers, charge fees for paid prioritization or even ‘fast lane’ internet, in an article written by Peter Gregory states “Even though ISPs have been able to do this for most of the time since the internet began, instances of it occurring have been incredibly rare.” Government interference into an otherwise free market, can severely impact the industry, just for a few instances of a few companies unethically charging inflated prices.
John Thune, a U.S. senator from South Dakota and also chairman of the Committee of Commerce, Science, and Transpiration, also agree that reclassify the Internet from an information service to a Title II utility will severely hinder the forward progress and the accessibility of the Internet. During a committee meeting on March 18, 2015, Mr Thune remarked:
“The tech and telecom industries agree on few regulatory matters, but there was one idea that unified them for nearly two decades: the Internet is not the telephone network and you cannot apply the old rules of telecom to the new world of the Internet. Three weeks ago, three regulators turned their backs on that consensus, and I believe the Internet and its users will ultimately suffer for it.” (U.S. Government, 2015)
Net Neutrality & Libraries Net neutrality is becoming an increasingly common concern for libraries.
Many libraries have within their mission statement a write-up, among other things, about being able to provide access to information for their patrons (Bangert, 2006). While fifty years ago information meant access to books, newspaper, magazines, and periodicals. In today’s society that also means access to the internet. Libraries are a central hub of information and resources to their communities. But what happens when the accessibility of one of those resources become compromised?
How These Changes Are Affecting Libraries One way in net neutrality is affecting libraries is in the ability to provide unbiased, unrestricted access to resources on the Internet. Sara White of the Pratt Institute School of Library and Information Science stated “This issue is one that librarians should take notice of, as it potentially affects abilities of users to exercise intellectual freedoms and could impact the library’s ability to provide services to its users.” (White, 2014). One of the core missions of the library is to provide access to information. However, if and/or when that ability is affected, libraries are at the forefront to champion for net neutrality …show more content…
regulations. With the reclassification of the Internet to a Title II Utility, many within the library field are rejoicing. Former ALA president Courtney Young stated “The FCC vote in favor of strong, enforceable net neutrality rules is a win for students, creators, researchers, and learners of all ages.” (Enis, 2015). While libraries may not experience changes to the level of streaming content from their Internet service providers, it does not mean the fight should be given up. Net Neutrality is a constant battle that will wage for the foreseeable future.
How These Changes Will Change the Future of the Library Net Neutrality has been a part of the history of the library and will also be a part of the future.
Ideas on How to Negate the Issue There have been considerable controversy and debate surrounding net neutrality. When the Internet became commercially available in the mid 1990s, the FCC classified the Internet as an information service. This allowed for the private sector to build the physical infrastructure of connecting homes, businesses, and governments to the internet. The private sector also elevated and advanced the technology involved to what it is today. However, Internet service providers have also been found of violating ethical issues in regards to paid prioritization and data throttle. They have slowed the data speed of web content, until the content providers could afford to pay to prioritize their data. However, without the investment of the private sector, the internet would not be what it is today. The private sector is also afraid that government intervention would lower investments and subsequently various inventions that are necessary to the forward progress of technology. Is there a way to appease both sides of the debate?
Create a Legislative Outcome That Is Fair To All Parties When discussing legislative outcomes that could be beneficial to both sides of the net neutrality debate, it is important to advise, these suggestions are curtailed to the United States.
While the Internet is a global presence, however, there is currently no official global governance in place to regulate the Internet. One way to embrace net neutrality regulations, but also respect the investment of the private sector, is creating a legislative outcome that could potentially be beneficial to both parties. The purpose of net neutrality is not to squash innovation, but to eliminate content discrimination by Internet service providers. One potential way to appease both sides, is to allow the private sector to remain an invested member in shaping the forward progress of the internet. This will allow the private sector to determine which areas of progress to develop and enhance. They could determine to invest heavily in fiber optics or even expanding to underdeveloped areas. By allowing the private sector to determine for themselves, helps the telecommunications industry as a whole. At the same time, enforce rules in which paid prioritization, data throttling, and data discrimination are illegal. By regulating the industry to remain fair and neutral, while at the same time allowing the telecommunications industry to determine the future, may provide the best outcome for both parties. While some in the private sector are
hesitant to government oversight in any capacity, it is necessary to remember that government regulation does not crush innovation.
Allow the Internet to Become Self-Regulated The Internet is not one thing in specific. Instead it is many different parts, working independently and at the same time in tandem to provide a resource that has quickly become a staple in everyday life. Another solution would allow complete removal of government regulation. By removing government oversight would allow the telecommunications industry to become self-regulated. Self-regulation would force Internet service providers to compete with each other in order to maintain and obtain consumers. This removal of regulation, would allow the government to allocate the resources to other governmental departments. Internet service providers have been able to slow or block web content since the very beginning. However, these instances are very few and very far between. “The American Civil Liberties Union, an enthusiastic supporter of net neutrality, lists only four incidents, none of which have happened since 2007.” (Gregory, 2015). So while one of the arguments for net neutral is based on internet service providers limiting access to web content, these cases are extremely rare. With past growth and expansion to the internet, indicates that internet service providers are able to adequately self-regulate.