"Net neutrality" would act to reverse the longstanding increase in broadband access in America

Disagree

1 of 7

by Corbin McGrath

Write now Print Invite a writer™ Add to Favorites RSS Feed Contact this writer

There is a quiet war being waged in blogs, discussion forums, and other places on the Internet. The issue at hand: Net Neutrality. A vague term referring to the indiscriminate transfer of information over the Internet (dictionary.com). Net Neutrality began gaining attention when:
"In 2005, the FCC raised eyebrows when it investigated a small broadband provider, Madison River Communications, that had blocked access to Vonage's VoIP application. The matter ended when the provider agreed to unblock Vonage and pay a fine (more on this case later). Some argue that the source of the FCC's power to regulate net neutrality is based on the Supreme Court's 1997 decision allowing the agency to enforce "must-carry" regulations, which required cable companies to include local channels in their lineup. (Hannan)"
Companies like Google, Yahoo, and almost every site on the Internet are in support of Net Neutrality. On the other side lie large communications companies such as Comcast and Verizon who claim sites like Google and Yahoo should pay for using network bandwidth (Oates). As would be expected, founders of the Internet and protocols including Vint Cerf and Robert Khan have weighed in on the conflict and offer different opinions. Sites like SaveTheInternet.com have popped up allowing people to organize into one voice for Net Neutrality but in the end, the decision lies in the hands of lawmakers.
With the advances in technology that have taken place since the creation of the Internet, we are capable of streaming movies, music, and other large quantities of data. Frank Long, course director of Computers, Math and the Internet at Full Sail, explained that the internet backbone is only a few hubs scattered around the country with a limited number of main lines connecting consumer markets to the Internet. Since streaming large amounts of data uses an incredible amount of bandwidth, Internet companies are proposing "tiered" networks (savetheinternet.com ). This kind of system will allow companies like Verizon, AT&T, and Time Warner to analyze information being sent and deciding which gets sent first and how fast. The large corporations argue that this type of network policy is needed to ensure QoS, Quality of Service. The companies say that in order to provide services such as home health monitoring, they need to be able to control information being sent (Farber). In other words, a doctor performing remote surgery would have his video data moving across the network at necessary speed but slowing down the person trying to download pictures from his email. When there is a too much data moving across a provider's line, traffic will slow down. Providers claim they need to be able to choose what slows down, such as a music download versus health monitoring (Farber).
The supporters of Net Neutrality paint a very different picture. While the large Telecom companies use the argument of home health monitoring and remote surgery, they neglect to include the fact that they would be in control of the information you are allowed to see (Google). The consumer already pays to access the Internet. Large companies are trying to make sites like Yahoo pay for access to the network as well. Yahoo argues that without sites like itself, Google, Amazon, and all others, the Internet would not exist and the Internet companies only have business because of them (Oates). Google argues that Internet providers would be able to limit access to websites by making them so difficult to access. If they control the speed of information, they can make a site load so slow, people will not be able to access it. This is a problem because it would allow the Internet companies to filter presidential candidates, news sources, and other sites (Google). Vint Cerf, one of the creators of TCP/IP supports Net Neutrality saying,
"Nothing less than the future of the Internet is at stake in these discussions. We must preserve neutrality in the system in order to allow the new Googles of the world, the new Yahoo!s, the new Amazons to form. We risk losing the internet as catalyst for consumer choice, for economic growth, for technological innovation, and for global competitiveness. (Oates)"
Supporters of Net Neutrality do not want a "pay-for-play" network where sites that pay the Internet providers more get better access.
I have been following this issue for a while and have looked at both sides. It is obvious to me that Net Neutrality must exist until a different way is thought up to solve bandwidth problems. A tiered Internet would allow Internet providers to limit my access to sites, pictures, movies, and other information. And while I would like to think my provider is neutral when deciding what content to limit, I am reminded that people with political and moral views run them. I do not like that conflict of interest. This ties in directly with the issue of censorship from this week's lesson. While I do agree the Internet needs to be improved to allow improved data flow, I think the companies should look at their physical connections first. They should upgrade their networks with fiber optic lines instead of limiting my content. With the millions of dollars they make each year, would it be that much of a problem? It also does not help when policymakers who do not know anything about the Internet are responsible for creating laws that have to do with Net Neutrality. A great example of this is a clip from Senator Ted Stevens where he explains that the "internet is a series of tubes" and that "internet was sent to (him) by (his) staff the other day." Other than those few statements, most of what he says is unintelligible. See the video here (http://youtube.com/ watch?v=f99PcP0aFNE) . The Internet is very new and will constantly evolve. Based on the information I collected, I am can say with confidence that eliminating Net Neutrality at this current moment would not benefit the consumer or the Internet itself.

Works Cited

"Net Neutrality." Webster's New Millennium Dictionary of English, Preview Edition (v 0.9.7). Lexico Publishing Group, LLC. 27 Jan. 2008. .

http://www.engadget. com/2007/03/29/net-n eutrality-and-the-fc c-whats-being-done-t o-preserve-it/

http://www.washingto npost.com/wp-dyn/con tent/article/2007/01 /18/AR2007011801508. html

http://www.theregist er.co.uk/2006/01/31/ att_charge_for_broad band/

http://www.google.co m/help/netneutrality .html

http://www.oreillyne t.com/pub/a/network/ 2002/06/11/platform. html

Learn more about this author, Corbin McGrath.
Click here to send Author comments or questions.