Should The Government Regulate The Internet?
" The United States of America is a government established in the context of calls for independence from what was believed to be a tyranny of the British government. From this foundation, we have birthed core American values, freedom chief among them. This has manifested itself within the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights that states that as citizens of America we have the right to free speech. Flash forward to today, and this amendment has been argued over time and time again, for how much freedom is too much when the common good hangs in the balance? With the rise of new technologies and globalization, the Internet has become a primary form of communication, serving as a basis for a new kind of speech that can reach more people than
…show more content…
Net neutrality rules have allowed the Federal Communications Commission to ensure that Internet providers cannot block websites or charge users for higher quality service. This has guaranteed equal access to the Internet and enables websites to practice controversial speech without fear of being shut down. Recent events have threatened this security of freedom of the Web with the vote by the FCC to repeal such rules. The Internet functions as a database for all the information of the world, including media platforms, a primary means of enacting social influence. As such, the freedom for companies to regulate the Internet is as much a problem as government regulation. Yes, this is an infringement on the private property rights of Internet providers. But the Internet has grown to have such a huge impact on the world today that in this situation there must be an exception for the common good. The power to limit websites is the power to influence opinions, and opinions are the groundwork of a democracy. Not only can it be power over the views of the people, but also their votes, their actions. The government should be expected to restrict such a power while not expanding their own. Regulations on net neutrality have done just that: the Internet is expected to be untampered with by both parties. Governments should limit corporate control over the Internet while allowing individuals to monitor their own content and those they are responsible
Net neutrality rules have allowed the Federal Communications Commission to ensure that Internet providers cannot block websites or charge users for higher quality service. This has guaranteed equal access to the Internet and enables websites to practice controversial speech without fear of being shut down. Recent events have threatened this security of freedom of the Web with the vote by the FCC to repeal such rules. The Internet functions as a database for all the information of the world, including media platforms, a primary means of enacting social influence. As such, the freedom for companies to regulate the Internet is as much a problem as government regulation. Yes, this is an infringement on the private property rights of Internet providers. But the Internet has grown to have such a huge impact on the world today that in this situation there must be an exception for the common good. The power to limit websites is the power to influence opinions, and opinions are the groundwork of a democracy. Not only can it be power over the views of the people, but also their votes, their actions. The government should be expected to restrict such a power while not expanding their own. Regulations on net neutrality have done just that: the Internet is expected to be untampered with by both parties. Governments should limit corporate control over the Internet while allowing individuals to monitor their own content and those they are responsible