Net Neutrality
Comcast and ATT are functioning together to eliminate the Net Neutrality act. This gives them the capacity to charge more for the websites we use the most. Net Neutrality needs to be preserved to keep everyone in the same lane giving everyone the same chance to flourish. On the other side, some companies are claiming that because of Net Neutrality businesses of all sizes are struggling to elevate their infrastructure (Press).
ATT believes that Net Neutrality must be demolished because it is a wall keeping them from expanding their infrastructure (Curtis). Many streaming sites like Netflix and Hulu are being overrun by free streaming sites and due to their loss in income, they are struggling to progress their legal business on the internet. They presuppose that if their websites were faster, while the rivals are slower, they can have an
…show more content…
First off, both ideas bring security and a way to upgrade their infrastructure. The difference is how they view it. Proponents of Net Neutrality view security best when the community chooses what is seen or not rather than the government. Opponents view security best when the content is blocked before it reaches the community. Then there is infrastructure where Net Neutrality benefits the lower tiered businesses, whereas rivals of Net Neutrality benefit the higher tiered businesses. The lower tier needs the internet to grow and paying more for it is not at all helpful. The higher tier needs to grow also, but they can’t because the lack of benefits they can give to their customers through the fast lane. To make a common ground, the internet providers could make several plans, each benefiting a certain financial tier, and have the companies choose which they want. This way, the small companies no longer must pay more for what they don’t need while the big companies can provide a more premium quality website for their