Sie sind auf Seite 1von 5

Matthew Johnson

Professor Robert Arnold


English 2116
November 11, 2014
The Battle for Net Neutrality
The internet is a place for free speech and content creation. It is also a place for users to
share their creations with a large audience from around the world. Internet Service Providers;
however, would like to see an end to the fair and free distribution of content to users. To try to
gain more power over the web, ISPs have pushed a proposal to allow themselves to impose
internet fast lanes. These fast lanes will allow them to impede service for content providers that
do not pay an extra fee directly to the ISP. If said fast lanes were implemented, it would give
ISPs censorship of the internet and allow them to draw income from both ends of the service (the
user and the content provider).
To find a solution to save net neutrality, I have researched into the effects people can
have on contacting their representative or senator and commenting on the Federal
Communications Commission website. Some efforts are already underway. The recent Internet
Slowdown Day had very positive results with large amounts of people contacting their
representatives and commenting on the FCCs website. These two solutions, when implemented
on a large scale, can have very desirable effects.
To solve the issue of internet fast lanes and protect the neutrality of the net, I propose that
the community and users of the internet cry out and comment on the protection of net neutrality.

Net neutrality is a vital aspect of the internet. Internet Service Providers, such as
Comcast, are pushing for the Federal Communications Commission to allow the implementation
of internet fast lanes. These fast lanes would allow ISPs to throttle, or slow down, connections
from content providers that do not pay a premium fee for a better fast lane. After implementing
these proposed fast lanes, ISPs would be allowed to draw fees from the users and the content
providers alike. This is a blatant disregard for net neutrality, and will make the internet an
extremely censored version of itself. Drawing funds from both ends of internet content would
also create price hikes from content providers, such as Netflix, to users. In 2014, Comcast
claimed that Netflix used up approximately thirty percent of its bandwidth (Carr). Comcast
argued that because Netflix used up such a large amount of bandwidth, that they were entitled to
charge Netflix a fee to continue to stream at the speeds they originally had. Netflix agreed to this,
as they had no choice in the matter, and prices for consumers went up from $7.99 a month to
$8.99 a month (Carr). Internet fast lanes are harmful to quality content on the internet and to
users wallets.
The most effective way to fight against the destruction of internet fast lanes is for people
to band together and cry out. The United States is a free country, and its citizens are entitled to
the right to protest against changes they disagree with. When people let their voices be heard,
change can happen. This has happened several times in history, such as the Revolutionary War
and the Civil Rights Movement in the 1960s. There are already movements taking place to unite
people against internet fast lanes. In 2014, the Internet Slowdown Day took place. This event
was organized by several internet websites such as Netflix, Reddit, and Wordpress. Its purpose
was to show the effects of what could happen to the internet if these proposed internet fast lanes
were passed by the FCC (M. H.). These companies brought awareness of the issue to its users

and implored them to comment on the FCCs website and request that broadband be reclassified
to a telecommunications service (M. H.). If this reclassification were to take place, internet
would fall under the already in-place Communication Act of 1934, ensuring the equality of
content (M.H.). Multiple organized protest events such as the Internet Slowdown Day could
propel the FCC to go forward with this reclassification or at least shoot down the request for
internet fast lanes.
The outcry from citizens has already warranted response from figures in high offices. The
former commissioner for the FCC from 2001 to 2011 Michael Copps made a statement in 2014
that the FCC should reclassify broadband as a telecommunications service, making it fall under
Title II of the Communication Act of 1934 (Brodkin). There is strong evidence that many
members of the FCC (including Chairman Tom Wheeler) are lobbyists for the industries that
they are supposed to regulate (Brodkin). Having a former FCC commissioner make a statement
saying that the FCC should reclassify broadband is a huge step forward in the right direction.
Even more recently, an even bigger step was made. On November 10th, 2014, President Barack
Obama released a statement saying he believed that Internet Service Providers should not be able
to throttle content, nor be allowed to impose internet fast lanes. Obama claims, "I believe the
FCC should create a new set of rules protecting net neutrality and ensuring that neither the cable
company nor the phone company will be able to act as a gatekeeper, restricting what you can do
or see online." (Snider and Yu). While the FCC works independently from the government, this
prod from Obama could be the straw that breaks the camels back. This push from Obama could
force the FCC to reclassify broadband services. Should Obamas statements lead to the
protection of net neutrality, it will be arguably the most revolutionary decision from a 21st
century president. These two statements are proof that citizens voicing out can make a

difference. If the battlefield had stated quiet, internet fast lanes might have been implemented
months ago.
The next step in this internet fast lanes battle could be for citizens to contact their
representatives and senators. With the long absence of a decision on these lanes from the FCC,
Congress could be forced to intervene and impose new laws for broadband services. To know
what their constituents desire, people must contact them and tell the person they voted for to vote
how they want to be represented. One fall back of contacting Congress is the rampant issue of
lobbying. Comcast is known to heavily lobby Congress to make decisions in its own best
interest. Comcasts Executive Vice President David Cohen knows this, and recently said that
Congress should enact new laws about the internet (Snider and Yu). Cohen most likely wishes
the decision to go to Congress so that his companys lobbyists can sway the decision. While this
is a major drawback, I believe senators and representatives will vote in favor of net neutrality if
their reelections are up in the air for not listening to their constituents.
The battle for net neutrality has been a long-enduring fray. Past acts such as SOPA and
PIPA that threatened to censor the internet were eventually shot down due to the voice of the
citizens. These new fast lanes are a similar issue. There is still a long road ahead, but the outcry
has already caused political figures to enter the fray in favor of net neutrality, such as President
Obama and former commissioner Michael Copps. If people keep reaching out against these fast
lanes, I believe when the smoke clears, the internet will still be a space of free speech and
equality.

Works Cited

Brodkin, Jon. "Make ISPs into "common Carriers," Says Former FCC Commissioner." Ars
Technica. Ars Technica, 24 Jan. 2014. Web. 16 Oct. 2014. <http://arstechnica.com/techpolicy/2014/01/drop-regulatory-hammer-on-internet-providers-says-former-fcccommish/>.
Carr, David. "Warnings Along F.C.C.s Fast Lane." The New York Times. The New York
Times, 11 May 2014. Web. 16 Oct. 2014.
<http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/12/business/media/warnings-along-fccs-fastlane.html?_r=0>.
H, M. "Faux Go-slow." The Economist. The Economist Newspaper, 10 Sept. 2014. Web. 16 Oct.
2014. <http://www.economist.com/blogs/babbage/2014/09/net-neutrality>.
Snider, Mike, and Roger Yu. "Obama's Net Neutrality Push Cheers Some, Riles Others." USA
Today. Gannett, 10 Nov. 2014. Web. 10 Nov. 2014.
<http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/11/10/president-obama-net-neutralityreaction/18797601/>.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen