Net Neutrality: The Facts and Opinions

Net Neutrality. That has been a buzz phrase over the past month or so, but in its most basic form, what is net neutrality? Essentially, it is an economic policy employed by countries around the world which ensures that all internet service providers, or ISPs, make all data on the internet equally accessible. It prevents the ISPs from discriminating or favoring websites and/or content providers (like Netflix) by charging them more or less to get their material out to the public. Its rules include that all data is treated equally, illegal activity is to be persecuted, and no special privileges can be purchased. Now, after net neutrality has been repealed on December 14, one of the only real rules is that ISPs must publicly state that they are going to throttle or prioritize content. Opponents believe that net neutrality gives the government too much influence over the regulation of the internet, which many believe should remain free. Supporters view it as a public utility, and as such, must be regulated to ensure its fairness. They believe that consumers, not the ISPs, should decide--and thus make most easily accessible--which websites are best. Net neutrality can also protect freedom of speech and expression by preventing censorship of material. According to the Internet Association, the united league of many websites and content providers, ISPs claim that “net neutrality has hurt free speech and expression”. They argue that from 2009 to 2016, online data has increased 1000%. With net neutrality in effect, ISPs cannot charge different prices for customers to access certain websites based on the content that they provide.

One highly talked-of problem with the recent repeal of net neutrality is that it will benefit the ISPs substantially more than customers, small businesses, and schools and universities. ISPs can set higher prices for content providers to stream their data to customers more efficiently, in what are called ‘fast lanes’. Consequently, these content providers will charge consumers more for the content they receive to maintain their position in the ‘fast lanes’. For example, AT&T could allow subscribers faster and cheaper access to Direct TV, which it owns, and charge higher prices for access to Netflix, essentially forcing the subscriber to choose the option that will make AT&T the most money. Because large ISPs like AT&T lobbied hard for the repeal of net neutrality, it stands to reason that they fought for it because they would have the opportunity to make more money from their customers without its constrictions in effect. Contrastingly, some believe that net neutrality will not severely impact on the day to day lives of the general public. Some people agree with commission chairman Ajit Pai, who said that “the internet wasn’t broken in 2015 [when net neutrality was first introduced to the US]. We were not living in some digital dystopia.” He thinks that “the main problem consumers have with the internet is not and has never been that their internet provider is blocking access to content. It’s been that they don’t have access at all.” Other members on the commission, like Democrat Jessica Rosenworcel, take a very different view. She believes that the vote to repeal net neutrality gives ISPs the “green light to go ahead” and “discriminate and manipulate your internet traffic”. In an NPR interview, Richard Culatta, the CEO of the International Society for Technology in Education, said that he doesn’t think that the public will see an immediate or dramatic difference in their internet, but that he is very worried for the future of Internet. He is especially concerned for schools, because “the types of materials that...teachers are looking for don’t help the bottom line of Internet providers”. Essentially, ISPs have no financial incentive to provide the resources that many students rely on at high internet speeds. Thus, if these providers “choose to prioritize paid content over freely available content, schools really are at risk”.

Though many people feel strongly either for or against net neutrality, it is important to consider the range of pros and cons to this important topic before one forms a definite opinion. The general public will most likely not see dramatic and immediate effects on their internet. This being said, it is also very important for consumers to be watchful to prevent ISPs from potentially abusing the control that this repeal gives them. Whatever one’s opinion, it is vital that all people remain open minded and willing to listen to the views of others regarding such a topical issue as net neutrality.