Net neutrality is a concept that generally argues that internet service providers (ISP) should be neutral in how they grant access to bandwidth to users. In other words, ISPs cannot prioritize certain domains or users over others. The dialogue surrounding net neutrality often involves the question of whether or not the internet should be regulated as a utility, similar to electricity or phone lines. Advocates of net neutrality argue that the internet was founded on a principle of openness and fairness, and therefore, net neutrality must be defended so that major business or greedy ISPs do not disrupt these foundations. Pro-net neutrality groups claim it will maintain a level playing field and ensure quality internet access for everyone. Opponents of net neutrality adopt the notion that government intervention in business, especially one as large and vital to the greater economy as the internet, is dangerous and it stifles competition amongst providers. Additionally, the net neutrality opposition cites that the internet and the broader scope of technology change so rapidly and frequently that it is irresponsible to set up regulations that may be obsolete in only a few years.
After researching this topic, I am generally in favor net neutrality. I sympathize with the small tech start up who may not have the resources to compete with tech giants if net neutrality is undervalued. Additionally, many of the justifications for eliminating net neutrality cite the strain it may place on ISPs. While I understand this is a legitimate concern, I feel the greater concern should be for protecting internet companies and startups. There are far fewer ISPs than internet companies. The American economy has always emphasized encouraging small businesses and new innovation, but giving benefits to established ISPs at the cost of hurting startups does the opposite of this. The landscape of competition within the ISP domain versus that of Internet start-ups is much more limited. Setting up an ISP involves gaining control of telecommunications infrastructure, a much more unrealistic task than developing a web application or online retailer.
Of course, legitimate consideration must be made to ensure that over regulation does not occur. I would combat this by involving leaders in from both the Internet business world and the ISP world from the start. This would seek to ensure that those with the most vested interests in the matter are prioritized over political gains. Furthermore, I feel that it would be necessary to require that the laws undergo review on a frequent basis. Perhaps every 3 to 5 years the net neutrality regulations would be reviewed so that sweeping changes in the technology sphere could be accounted for if need be. At the core of this issue, I do believe quality internet access will come to be considered as more of a basic amenity. I worry that the word basic “right” may be to strong for this conversation, but I do believe Internet should be considered more like electricity and telephone line than like cable. People today depend on the Internet for so many aspects of our daily lives and providing excellent service to all at a reasonable price will help drive the American economy through the 21st century.
timpusaterisite 