EOTO 2: Net Neutrality

-

    Net neutrality is a set of rules that were first approved by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and put into effect in 2015 during the Obama administration which the main purpose is to keep the internet open and fair and prevent speed traps in it. The central principle of net neutrality is that internet service providers should treat equally all data on the internet without charging in a different way depending on the user, content, website, platform, application, type of equipment or method of communication. However, net neutrality rules were officially repealed in June 2018, signifying that the FCC eliminated the rules intended to prohibit internet providers from blocking or slowing down access to online content, as well as the rules for preventing them from prioritizing their own content. Most people in the United States really opposed this reversed decision that was prompted and encouraged by Republicans in Congress, the Trump administration, and leading broadband providers.



    The leading internet service provider companies like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T disliked net neutrality because of government interference in their business. Net neutrality opponents argue that under net neutrality regulations, there is little or no control on the identity of customers and the way these customers make use of the network, as with issues related to harmful traffic.
    On the opposite side, former President Obama and internet giants like Facebook, Google, and Netflix express that the internet is a public good and should be regulated like one, and without net neutrality the companies that own internet service could play favorites.


    Net neutrality prevents cable internet provider companies from demanding a payment that ensures quality or premium delivery which positions ISPs as gatekeepers. The way to control and optimize the performance of computer network traffic is traffic shaping, which is carried out by slowing down or throttling certain types of data such as streaming video or P2P (peer-to-peer) network file sharing - which allows users to access media files such as books, music, movies and games - and in this way control the amount of traffic sent into a network in a specified period (bandwidth throttling) or its speed.
    No net neutrality can lead to some advantages such as lower-priced plans for basic service and more improvements from broadband providers. However, the majority of people should expect to pay more as a basic service would not be enough to meet typical needs of today's internet use. Telecoms can act with total freedom deciding what content to block, censor, or slow down and give high priority to paid content over the rest. Comcast and other internet service provider companies can charge expensive fees to content companies such as Netflix, Google, or Facebook, without technically blocking, so any website or service may have to pay internet service providers (ISPs) to load their content, reducing the number and variety of free services. These charges can be passed to people who want to access Netflix, Facebook, Google, or any other service, in addition to the monthly fee already paid to Netflix, for example.
    In the absence of the net neutrality protections, the internet service provider companies now can discriminate against any lawful content by blocking websites or apps, and throttle broadband service according to the nature of the content. Without these rules, phone and cable companies can interfere with internet traffic as long as they disclose it.
    The repeal of net neutrality can give internet service providers too much control on how online content is delivered. Internet service providers can create "fast lanes" for those businesses like Google, Netflix, and YouTube, for example, that can pay a high fee to give speed and preference to their content and will put those companies that cannot pay in the slow lane affecting small and new businesses; this can impact also us as consumers because the internet would be turned into something similar to cable TV with bundles of service according to how much the consumer can pay, changing the internet from an open resource into a luxury item. Fast lanes and slow lanes can affect the speed at which people load websites and the number of websites available as some may vanish for their inability to pay to get faster to customers. In the long run, no net neutrality can make the internet like cable TV with internet service providers acting as gatekeepers, offering people bundle packages of websites, apps, and services instead of an open and unrestricted access to the internet.
    If companies structure the internet content in the form of paid tiers or bundles similar to cable TV, the global digital common - which refers to intellectual goods, knowledge products, creative works, free software tools, shared ideas, information, etc. that are freely shared in the internet - would be fragmented and only "fully" available to the segment of society that can afford the premium packages, and it would also affect institutions. Therefore, those people with limited economic means would afford only for a basic internet service at the lower tiers or low-priced bundle and would never see much of the internet if it is accessed through plans regulated by connection speed and amount of data.
    That would have a profound impact as a society as people with more access to full internet resources would benefit the most in knowledge, information, and opportunities, while less privileged members of society would struggle even more restricting their self-advancement. Consumers who would want to change their internet service provider due to second-rate service and blocked content would have limited options, while net neutrality ensures to keep the internet as a free and open technology.
    Net neutrality needs to be recovered. Even though the FCC repealed net neutrality rules in 2018, several state legislatures are defending net neutrality by issuing their own net neutrality laws. This year, a total of twenty states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico introduced net neutrality legislation.


Images:
  • https://www.wraltechwire.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/net-neutrality-2-960x640.jpg
  • https://www.dictionary.com/e/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Net_Neutrality_info_logo_clr_final.jpg
  • https://i2.wp.com/spicyip.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/net-neutrality.jpg
Video Sources:
  • https://youtu.be/QgwWzZRxH3o
  • https://youtu.be/HqXKEgTYZBQ
Sources of Information:
  • https://www.cnn.com/2019/04/10/tech/house-net-neutrality-vote/index.html
  • https://money.cnn.com/2018/06/11/technology/net-neutrality-repeal-explained/index.html
  • https://qz.com/1158328/what-will-happen-now-that-net-neutrality-is-gone-we-asked-the-experts/
  • https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/technology/net-neutrality/repeal.html
  • https://www.ncsl.org/research/telecommunications-and-information-technology/net-neutrality-2020-legislation.aspx
  • https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Final Blog: My Online Presence

-
Image
    In almost thirty years, the rise of technology related to media and communication has been impressive. The birth of the World Wide Web started with one site in 1991. Today, the number of available websites reaches over 1.74 billion with 59 percent of the global population as active users. The internet and mobile technology innovations contributed to have in 2020 about 2.95 billion people around the world using social media and yet this number is constantly growing, and an expanding amount of 4.41 billion available apps in Google Play and Apple's App Store combined, and with them, digital technology has prompted a change on norms and the way of life to billions of people.     Actually, the technology of today is so interlocked with us as individuals and as a society that it works as part of ourselves to expand our communication capabilities and outreach potential without frontiers, bringing numerous advantages that impact our culture, lifestyle, economy, education, politics, awa
Read more

EOTO 1: Motion Pictures

-
Image
Introduction     In over one century, motion pictures have transformed the world, developing into the most popular and influential media of the 20th century and beyond, with great impact on cultures, societies, politics, and arts, as motion pictures achieve widespread presence to be viewed not only at movie theatres, but also on television broadcast, streaming services, and digital technology that constantly reach millions of people day after day.     Motion pictures, also called films or movies, became a form of art. Motion pictures emerged at the end of the 19th century and were quickly recognized as perhaps the first truly mass form of entertainment. Movies connect people with appealing stories about shared interests, dreams, or concerns, allowing people to perceive the world and understand others through a combination of art, talent, industry, and technology. The Beginning of Motion Pictures Muybridge & Marey     In the 19th century, motion pictures resulted from experimenting
Read more

Blog 5: The Stifled Opinions of Dissent

-
Image
The voices rarely heard in mainstream news, the thoughts hardly found in the internet search engines or in social media newsfeed, and all types of expressions promoting views that can be perceived as radical, unpatriotic, or overcritical are destined to become the stifled opinions of dissent. These are small factions that defend unpopular principles and viewpoints against the ones of prominent organizations that have extensive power in the government system holding a widespread influence on society. Examples of such voices can be the webpages or social media portals of libertarians, socialists, or American conservatives, or those from anti-war movements particularly in times of war. The question is if the First Amendment protects them. The First Amendment protecting the freedom of expression has been tested in numerous occasions. In times of war or internal social turmoil, people who dare to express ideas that challenge the government have faced repression, censorship, and severe jail
Read more