The Pros And Cons Of Net Neutrality

The current internet as we know it is a free internet. Anyone who pays an internet service provider (ISP) for access to their infrastructure can access the web’s multitude of information to the extent of the law. This principle of unrestricted access to the internet is currently known as net neutrality. Net neutrality is one of the key aspects of the internet that has allowed for it to grow so large. However net neutrality is currently facing an incredible battle for its survival. “Since 2005 the biggest opponents of net neutrality (Verizon, AT&T, Comcast and their allies) have lobbied against [it]” (Furnas). The same people who provide us with access to the internet want to control how we use it. They would like to acquire extra profits by
By permitting ISPs to control the content we access, we ultimately allow for them to censor us. In his popular comedy show Last Week Tonight with John Oliver, John Oliver speaks on the topic of net neutrality to his audience. He starts off by saying that “the internet is not broken” and goes on to provide proof on why taking away net neutrality would have negative effects on the internet. He says that taking away net neutrality would allow for large companies “to buy their way into the fast lane and leave everyone else in the slow lane”. Furthermore he goes on to negate statements from ISP representatives saying that other data would not be slowed down, by showing evidence that proves otherwise. (Oliver) On paper ISP’s are not admitting to censorship, however in practice they would be taking away everything unique about the internet. Furthermore censorship of the internet is censorship of the arts; it takes away everything from binge viewing cat GIFs to Netflix movie marathons. If we have learned anything about permitting censorship is that it destroys culture. In 1642 the English parliament destroyed English theater by banning performances across England due to the sex and violence found in famous works from play writers like Shakespeare. “Had the closure come a mere 50 years earlier, we [would] have lost Romeo and Juliet and everything that followed” (Postrel 165). It is
Opponents of Net Neutrality argue that by passing laws to protect Net Neutrality they are inhibiting the development of the web as restricting ISPs from controlling content would decrease investment in their companies (Kerpen). This however is not true. The value of stock shares in ISPs today are very high, this impart because access to internet is incredibly popular and investors know that the product will sell. Furthermore if the problem is profit, ISPs should raise the price for access not availability. The internet has become popular because of its free interface. If ISPs start charging websites in order to make their sites more readily available, they will slow down the development of the web. Small companies rely on a free web for their survival. They cannot afford to pay the high fees and require easy access in order to maintain customer appeal. Furthermore websites that provide subscriptions services will have to increase their charges as they have to increase profits in order to pay “fast lane” fees and maintain enough profit. The ideas that ISPs are trying to pass off as an excuse for giving them control are simply not true. ISPs are trying to make more profits and they are trying to mess the free establishment that is the internet in order to do