Why We Should Keep Net Neutrality
287 million people use the internet in the United States of America every day. Nearly all of them could never imagine coming home and not being able to access Facebook, YouTube, or even Netflix. Without the protection Net Neutrality provides, this could happen. Net Neutrality is a principle in place that makes sure that all internet users have access to all content, regardless of source without Internet Service Providers (ISPs) giving unfair pricing, slowing down internet speed for certain sites, or blocking sites altogether. Despite the fact that many people argue against Net Neutrality, we as a nation should keep Net Neutrality for the sake of our citizens. There are several reasons that substantiate that we should keep internet neutrality
…show more content…
laws, including, the protection of information and prevention of higher costs.
One of the many reasons why we should keep Net Neutrality is because it prevents higher costs for consumers.
Without Net Neutrality, the ISPs could charge companies whatever they wanted for high-speed internet. While the ISPs are charging the companies more and not the people, it would still affect both of them. “If Comcast were to charge Netflix more, it…will pass those charges along to their customers. If the cost of access doubles for Netflix, that monthly subscription plan would likely go from $9.99 to $19.98” (Source 2, 3). By the ISPs charging the companies that provide services for the people, it would end up costing the person buying these services more. The companies being charged higher rates would have to compensate by charging their consumers because the ISPs are forcing them to do so. Getting rid of Net Neutrality would eventually cost more for consumer. Also, the repeal of internet neutrality laws would have a detrimental effect on our public access to internet. By removing Net Neutrality, it would, “...hurt small startups and public or non-profit content providers (like libraries) that can’t afford to buy a ‘fast lane’ for our educational, research, archival or other digital collections. Content providers that pay more for a fast lane also may pass this extra charge onto consumers, so it also could mean libraries and schools – already facing budget troubles – would end up paying more for some commercial content than they pay today” (Source 4, 2). Net Neutrality protects our non-profit internet providers. Libraries would have to charge people to use their internet or not give free access at all. Schools would end up paying more, and that would cost more for parents trying to send their kids to school, whether it be public or private. This would affect all of the low-income families across the country. Kids wouldn’t be able to go to school because they wouldn’t be able to pay the tuition. On the other hand, people may argue that by charging companies
more, that would lead to free access to certain sites. However, if the ISPs charge one company more, that company would pass those raised prices onto their customers effectively costing more for the American consumer. The ISPs would be charging large companies more for their internet, which could lead to free access to certain sites that you would usually have to pay for. But, by charging companies more, that would raise the costs for their customers (Source 4, 2). While getting rid of Net Neutrality will give people free access to certain sites, it would raise the prices for companies and people. The amount of money that would be have to be paid is not equivalent to free access to a couple of sites. The raised prices would always cost more than free, but limited, access to websites. Even with the few positive outcomes of repealing Net Neutrality, the many negatives outweigh those reasons by ten-fold.
Another reason why we should keep Net Neutrality is to protect our freedom of information. Without our freedom to information, everyone who uses the internet would be uninformed and biased towards certain sides on issues because ISPs would be able to control what we see. The freedom to information is protected by Net Neutrality, and that,“...means an ISP under net neutrality cannot block access, change services, or alter the flow of data simply because there is something that goes on which they don’t like” (Source 2, 1). Net Neutrality protects our freedom to information. We can access anything we want at anytime we want it. ISPs cannot block or slow down what they don’t want us to see. Net Neutrality ensure that we can access all websites without having to worry about only seeing biased sources. It protects our rights to have all of the information we seek without the ISPs hindering that ability. People would also be able to say whatever they want to say because they would be able to voice their opinions as long as it is legal. “Blogs, services, businesses, and any website that can operate legally is able to do so and be available because of net neutrality. There isn’t any censorship available as long as the content being offered meets legal obligations.” (Source 2, 2). This country was built on the principle that people should be able to say what they want to say without being worried about the consequences. Net Neutrality believes in theis concept as well. It makes it so people can say what they want to say without being worried about being censored by their ISP. While this is true, others argue that because ISPs “promise” not to discriminate against other companies by slowing down or blocking their content. But, there is no way to make sure that these companies follow through with their promise. There is no way we can be sure that the ISPs will follow through. We cannot regulate them. With NN, we would be able to make sure that ISPs couldn’t do this to people. Unless you argue against freedom of expression and being able to say what you what to say, you side with NN.
laws, including, the protection of information and prevention of higher costs.
One of the many reasons why we should keep Net Neutrality is because it prevents higher costs for consumers.
Without Net Neutrality, the ISPs could charge companies whatever they wanted for high-speed internet. While the ISPs are charging the companies more and not the people, it would still affect both of them. “If Comcast were to charge Netflix more, it…will pass those charges along to their customers. If the cost of access doubles for Netflix, that monthly subscription plan would likely go from $9.99 to $19.98” (Source 2, 3). By the ISPs charging the companies that provide services for the people, it would end up costing the person buying these services more. The companies being charged higher rates would have to compensate by charging their consumers because the ISPs are forcing them to do so. Getting rid of Net Neutrality would eventually cost more for consumer. Also, the repeal of internet neutrality laws would have a detrimental effect on our public access to internet. By removing Net Neutrality, it would, “...hurt small startups and public or non-profit content providers (like libraries) that can’t afford to buy a ‘fast lane’ for our educational, research, archival or other digital collections. Content providers that pay more for a fast lane also may pass this extra charge onto consumers, so it also could mean libraries and schools – already facing budget troubles – would end up paying more for some commercial content than they pay today” (Source 4, 2). Net Neutrality protects our non-profit internet providers. Libraries would have to charge people to use their internet or not give free access at all. Schools would end up paying more, and that would cost more for parents trying to send their kids to school, whether it be public or private. This would affect all of the low-income families across the country. Kids wouldn’t be able to go to school because they wouldn’t be able to pay the tuition. On the other hand, people may argue that by charging companies
more, that would lead to free access to certain sites. However, if the ISPs charge one company more, that company would pass those raised prices onto their customers effectively costing more for the American consumer. The ISPs would be charging large companies more for their internet, which could lead to free access to certain sites that you would usually have to pay for. But, by charging companies more, that would raise the costs for their customers (Source 4, 2). While getting rid of Net Neutrality will give people free access to certain sites, it would raise the prices for companies and people. The amount of money that would be have to be paid is not equivalent to free access to a couple of sites. The raised prices would always cost more than free, but limited, access to websites. Even with the few positive outcomes of repealing Net Neutrality, the many negatives outweigh those reasons by ten-fold.
Another reason why we should keep Net Neutrality is to protect our freedom of information. Without our freedom to information, everyone who uses the internet would be uninformed and biased towards certain sides on issues because ISPs would be able to control what we see. The freedom to information is protected by Net Neutrality, and that,“...means an ISP under net neutrality cannot block access, change services, or alter the flow of data simply because there is something that goes on which they don’t like” (Source 2, 1). Net Neutrality protects our freedom to information. We can access anything we want at anytime we want it. ISPs cannot block or slow down what they don’t want us to see. Net Neutrality ensure that we can access all websites without having to worry about only seeing biased sources. It protects our rights to have all of the information we seek without the ISPs hindering that ability. People would also be able to say whatever they want to say because they would be able to voice their opinions as long as it is legal. “Blogs, services, businesses, and any website that can operate legally is able to do so and be available because of net neutrality. There isn’t any censorship available as long as the content being offered meets legal obligations.” (Source 2, 2). This country was built on the principle that people should be able to say what they want to say without being worried about the consequences. Net Neutrality believes in theis concept as well. It makes it so people can say what they want to say without being worried about being censored by their ISP. While this is true, others argue that because ISPs “promise” not to discriminate against other companies by slowing down or blocking their content. But, there is no way to make sure that these companies follow through with their promise. There is no way we can be sure that the ISPs will follow through. We cannot regulate them. With NN, we would be able to make sure that ISPs couldn’t do this to people. Unless you argue against freedom of expression and being able to say what you what to say, you side with NN.