Net Neutrality gaining national attention

Post date: Dec 11, 2017 3:54:14 PM

Published 12/11/17

By Amanda Anderson, '19

PHOTO COURTESY OF WIKIMEDIA COMMONS

A group of protestors gather in Seattle, Washington to voice their beliefs about the importance of net neutrality. There have been protests throughout much of the country recently, especially in big cities, including Washington D.C.. there are protests scheduled to take place at multiple Verizon stores.

On Dec. 14, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) will vote on whether to uphold the rules currently in place that protect net neutrality. This vote has the potential to change the current nature of the internet, affecting all individuals, including WHHS students.

However, many do not realize the importance of this vote because net neutrality seems somewhat complex and is not commonly discussed.

So, what is net neutrality?

Merriam Webster’s Dictionary defines net neutrality as “the idea, principle or requirement that Internet service providers should or must treat all Internet data as the same regardless of its kind, source or destination.” This means that service providers such as AT&T, Verizon and Comcast are not legally allowed to limit the accessibility of certain sites just because it isn’t a beneficial site for their business model and must remain neutral on who they provide service to.

However, some businesses have broken these rules in the past, such as when The Madison River Communications Company restricted users’ access to Vonage, a rival internet and telephone service provider. The company was reprimanded by the FCC and fined $15,000. Without this admonishment, internet suppliers such as the Madison River Communications Company could continue to control what their customers view and have access to.

This has caused an uproar from citizens who have realized how detrimental this could be.

A Forbes article entitled “When The FCC Kills Net Neutrality, Here’s What Your Internet Could Look Like,” details how the internet could potentially be changed and resold to users if these regulations are lifted. This means websites would be bundled in packages in a similar fashion to television channels and sold through subscriptions. This article predicts that these subscriptions could cost a large amount with starter packages starting at $50 a month.

Internet today does not cost much less but current plans give users access to all websites available on the internet and the new plans would only grant access to a select group of sites.

In an interview with information and technology students, Tom Wheeler, the former head of the FCC under the Obama administration, elaborates on this issue, saying: “If you love your cable service… you’re gonna’ love what happens to the internet. Because instead of something that is open for everyone, it becomes like a cable system where the cable operator chooses who gets on [and] what tier they can go on. So, you can’t get ESPN unless you pay a higher tier. That is the antithesis of what the internet has always been about.”

Many citizens have begun to rally against this threat, calling it unconstitutional as it violates the First Amendment. Protesters say these actions go against their right to freedom of speech and the press by silencing the opinions of certain users on sites that it would block access to. This line of reasoning is not enough to stop this vote, and net neutrality still hangs in the balance. No matter which way the vote goes, the discussions about this topic are changing the future of the internet.