ipl-logo

Pros And Cons Of Net Neutrality Of The Internet

502 Words3 Pages

" The government should not regulate the internet since large corporations are able to control, alter, block or discriminate the type of content that is released to the public. Net neutrality has recently been the topic of controversy. It is not a set principle, but rather a flexible one. The repeal of the net neutrality bill has sparked an outrage in millions of people, with many activists fighting back. The repeal of the net neutrality bill is considered by some as unconstitutional in many aspects. To be rid of the open and “free” internet would not be beneficial towards the common person. The loss of neutrality would mean losing personal freedom and privacy. This constitutes as breaking the first amendment: freedom of press and speech. The fifth amendment-which protects the rights of life, liberty, and property- will be broken as well after the repeal of the net neutrality bill. The loss of the free and “open” internet will result in corporations such as Comcast and Verizon to distort the information that is released to their viewers. In consequence, the companies …show more content…

Without it, the common person would not be able to take weigh in on issues since the government could censor specific or essential information for that topic. The government is now able to discriminate on the individual using the internet based on many notions, such as religion or race. This could also mean that individuals can not share their story or create a difference in our society if the government chooses to amplify particular voices in favor over others. With an open platform, the public are able to display their activism, be given equal opportunities-whether it be educational, political, social, or economic-and help empower others to bring about change to our world. Without the internet as an open platform, there will be no activism, innovations, freedom of self-expression, and displays of

Show More
Related
763 Words | 4 Pages

In Network Neutrality Nuances, David Farber makes a contrasting counterpoint to Barbara van Schewick’s piece of net neutrality protecting us from abuse from our ISPs. Farber states that because the internet has always regulated itself over the course of its nature and is continuing to grow increasingly with no issues, we should continue to let the internet self-regulate. Thus David Farber is suggesting that the government and legislators take a reactive stance on the internet because over the course of the internet’s history it has shown to be growing exponentially. Farber continues to analyze the history of net neutrality and comes to the conclusion that any legislation that attempts to manage the internet will fail due to the incompetence of legislations regarding the internet as demonstrated by history. Farber attempts to inductively explain the pretense behind the legislations against net neutrality; however some of his examples ultimately fail to support his conclusion due to his very apparent position against legislators

Read More
885 Words | 4 Pages

In her well written and highly organized piece “The Nuances of Net Neutrality”, author Barbara van Schewick aims to convince readers of the need to increase net neutrality regulations in order to preserve the value of the internet. While the author presents some valid points she does not apply a thorough analysis on net neutrality, leading to the articles arguments falling apart once put under scrutiny. This is due to the use speculative language, lack of concrete examples, and failure to mention reasons why regulation is the best approach. In the article, Schewick writes in a clear and concise manner that allows the reader to easily follow the argument.

Read More
802 Words | 4 Pages

David Farber’s Counterpoint in “Net Neutrality Nuances” by Barbara Schewick and David Farber brings up a different perspective and analysis on the issue of Net Neutrality. Instead of agreeing with the opinion of the majority and supporting the idea of the government regulating the behavior of ISPs when it comes to the internet, he argues that the government should simply leave it undisturbed and refrain from passing any laws regarding net neutrality. He believes the government progress will only slow down and hinder the actual solution, which he believes is to let the internet work itself out and resolve its own problems as it has done so in the past. While he brings up valid counterpoints to Barbara Schewick’s points that support regulation, David

Read More
594 Words | 3 Pages

With the world population being 7,259,902,243 people, a grossly huge amount of people use the Internet, the number being 3,366,261,156 people worldwide. That ends up being almost half of the population, the percentage being 46.4% I one hundred percent disagree with the “decision” of the government ridding of the Internet entirely, as if that isn't clear enough already. Though the government might find the termination of the Internet useful in some circumstances, I have no doubt that it may result in riots, violence, protests, and more in order to get it

Read More
1491 Words | 6 Pages

“A garbled echo returned to her. A final surge of fury shook her and she roared, ‘Who do you think you are?’” (O’Connor 33) This line is from Revelation when Mrs. Turpin was talking to a person that judged her, little did she know this person was jesus. Flannery O’Connor is trying to show that people often put themselves before others without ever wanting or letting themselves and others judge them.

Read More
928 Words | 4 Pages

He emphasizes a crucial example that supports his claim, in which the Telecommunications Act in 1996 hurt numerous companies by the loss of money. In addition the FCC also is not a formidable party that are capable of making careful decision that will not hurt Internet service providers, “The FCC has a minimum amount of technical knowledge about the Internet and thus even when it acts, often misses the mark and can end up in lengthy court actions that an innovative new company cannot survive” (Farber, 2009). He’s concerned that the decisions regarding the Internet will be legislative. Essentially, David Farber’s point is that groups such as the FCC or the Congress who are not completely involved in the changes and events that occur to the Internet should not be able to make major decisions concerning the Internet; the past proves the potential

Read More
687 Words | 3 Pages

With net neutrality these privately owned network corporations were forced to follow certain rules which strips them off their rights. The 1st Amendment protects the freedom of expression, so regulation of what providers can put on their networks is an invasion of their freedom of expression, and without net neutrality the providers finally have a say in their networks and can run them the way they want now. The New York Times gave a quote by the Trump Administration saying _ÑÒ(the net neutrality rules) were intended to safeguard free expression online_Ñù, and this is true that net neutrality removes expression from the internet, which is one of its fundamental

Read More
2179 Words | 9 Pages

By now, you have probably heard about the Federal Communication Commission's, also known as the FCC, ruling on the Open Internet rules, but do you know what it means for you? The ruling is important to understand because it encompasses everyone who uses the internet and details the rights those users have. The ruling covers what internet service providers, what you can do, and what the FCC can do and required 400 pages of legal document to cover every avenue that could possibly be attacked in hopes to keep what we see as the internet today as what it will look like ten years from now. This essay will cover a few of the main rulings on the FCC decision of the Open Internet rules: an explanation of some rules, how they apply to consumers by using past examples, arguments against the Open Internet rules, critical responses to those arguments, and what will be ahead for the FCC.

Read More
459 Words | 2 Pages

Some people don't understand what it means to be free of taking by yourself and having the right of talking. The Federal communications commision is planning to change the net neutrality regulations to control the things we do. If we allow government agencies to further control our freedom to communicate, express, and locate information, we may wind up in the depressing dystopian society displayed in Fahrenheit 451. They want people to be alike but people were born to be different.

Read More
800 Words | 4 Pages

"The government should have control over the internet based on a middle ground that can be formed. Censorship can be harmful to the right that we have to equal access of knowledge. We as a people need to teach kids about the internet. The internet can never be a complete utopia free of evil. We can combat it the best we can, and we can learn how to handle it.

Read More
1759 Words | 8 Pages

The Federal Government Regulating Information on the Internet When it comes to internet censorship, it is a split argument whether limiting access on the web is a positive or negative solution. Having no buffer on internet users can lead to various threats and extreme false news and advertising. Many people debate that having the internet censored is violating freedom of speech, yet having no limits leads to threats and extreme false news and advertising. Other issues begin to arise when there is no barrier such as human trafficking and other various harmful content that can be found without any difficulty.

Read More
625 Words | 3 Pages

The net neutrality principle should be restored before we get left in the dark, not knowing any of the things that these companies might’ve

Read More
1932 Words | 8 Pages

Widely regarded as administers of public policy, governments are seen as the peace-makers and defenders of their respective nations; lauded and celebrated for their functioning role in all of its country’s citizens everyday lives. In fact, what makes the United States of America so special is deep-rooted diligence applied to the intricacies of its government. Each operating subset is checked, balances and always ripe for replacement with the concept of terms. It’s the reasons why this republic of mixed representative democracy are so bent on making sure liberty and justice is ensured for all — liberty is defined as the state of being free in a nation from oppression applied by the governing authority. In other words, it is the freedom of despotism and the way in which the country uses the internet is a direct

Read More
1470 Words | 6 Pages

People may say it’s eliminates our freedom of speech, but some people take advantage of that freedom and should have at least some limitation for what is said on the internet. According to David French, from the National Review, he states,“...freedom of speech does not mean a blanket permission to say anything...it means balancing the inherent value of a given view with the obligation to ensure that other members of a given community can participate”(French). In other words, everyone should express their opinion but in a mannerly style, and that all points of view should be apprehended for everyone’s individual opinion. Censorship’s part in our society is to protect the minds of the public to prevent the violent and traumatization it can

Read More
2033 Words | 9 Pages

A free internet is not one that is unregulated nor is one that is strictly regulated. There exists an elusive measure existing the spectrum that must be fulfilled without tainting the uniqueness of the internet. Two key features of a free internet, net neutrality and online freedom of speech, must be maintained throughout. The internet, as it is now, has paved a new path for communication in the modern era.

Read More

More about Pros And Cons Of Net Neutrality Of The Internet

Related Topics

Open Document