Safety Net Used As Murder Weapon Many Americans are hung up on fighting for Gay Rights or arguing about what side we should stand on the Israel conflict or even what they should watch on Netflix tonight. However, what they don’t realize they should be worrying about is Net Neutrality. Net Neutrality is, “the concept that broadband Internet service providers should provide nondiscriminatory access to internet content, platforms, etc., and should not manipulate the transfer of data regardless of its source or destination” (dictionary.com). Originally gaining a lot of attention back in 2004-2005 when Dialup internet was being replaced by broadband internet, most people have again recently heard about it, but never take the time to figure out …show more content…
Data discrimination can be described as, “the selective filtering of information by a service provider.” This is something that could become extremely dangerous to the common population of the United States. If the Government doesn’t regulate and enforce Net Neutrality, big name companies that are fighting for profits, would be able to essentially cover up anything bad that they did. They could pay off internet providers to completely block any and all information on a certain topic. During WWII many people in Germany had no clue what was going on in the concentration camps, that would become an issue again in our present day world. It is already an issue we see, and something of conspiracy in many circles, the government covering things up, but imagine if a company could completely cover up a serious political campaign to benefit their profit margins. The best example of this is currently taking place in China as we speak. The Chinese government has completely blocked any and all internet information of Tiananmen Square. There is no way for the people to look up even the date it happened on, the search results simply come up as “no results” this is why we need Net Neutrality. Imagine not being able to look up information on the civil rights
Typically, the person that is doing the cyberbullying is generally a victim of bullying themselves. How is cyberbullying done? Normally, the use of electronic devices to send messages that tend to emotional hurt someone feelings. Social media can lead to many negative outcomes when communicating to others. For example, if a teenage boy responds on a girl’s photo stating she is “ugly” is considered online bullying. One popular social media site is Facebook that over millions of people use for communicating. Facebook can be a positive source to communicate with family and friends that you may not see often. Also, it can be a very negative source that a lot of people use to criticize one another. Therefore, cyberbullying occurs nationwide
In addition advocates of Net Neutrality theorize that Internet Service Providers with particular political leanings may use this ruling to stagnate or even censor blog posts, articles, information, etc. that are at odds with that ISPs distinct political beliefs and activities. The Huffington Post published statements by a proponent of Net Neutrality, Sarah Kendzior, stating “The threat to net neutrality highlights the reliance on social media and an independent press for political organizing in the digital age. Should net neutrality be eliminated, those avenues will likely become curtailed for much of the public or driven out of business due to loss of revenue. Without the means to freely communicate online, citizens will be far less able to challenge the administration. It doesn’t matter what cause someone prioritizes: The elimination of net neutrality will impede the ability to understand the cause, discuss it and organize around it.”(Fuller, 2017). This stance is in line with the idea that The Trump Administration, and its allies are forging a pseudo dictatorial atmosphere around The Country, where big businesses and the economically advantaged benefit at the detriment of the middle and lower classes, and where facts are disregarded in place of propaganda and
[1] The concept of net neutrality is that all data on the internet must be treated equally. So, this means that internet service providers cannot use deep packet inspection [2] (which is reading information contained in a packet to detect signs of unwanted or “unsavory” data) or any other means to discriminate against specific types of data or content they don’t necessarily agree with. One important aspect of the argument is how such a system would affect minority/low-income groups. I believe that net neutrality is an overall benefit to such communities.
the August of 2005, the F.C.C. adopted a very important policy statement regarding net neutrality. This policy statement protects several things that are essential to anyone who frequently uses the Internet. It gives consumers the freedom to access any content and to use any application within the law. In early December, 2017, the F.C.C. voted to repeal it. However, just over half of the US states have made attempts to pass legislation that reinforces net neutrality. Net Neutrality protects American “internet freedom”, ensuring that the people can make full use of the internet and prevents Internet Service Providers from having too much control.
The fight for net neutrality has begun again with the FCC attempting to repeal the net neutrality act protected under Title Two. what exactly does that mean? Net neutrality is where an internet user has total unrestricted access to all internet content, and where big companies, such as Verizon or Comcast, are legally unable to control or regulate what someone can access. Furthermore, they cannot restrict access to specific content simply due to the fact that they disagree with the message that is being sent. This has been an ongoing battle, with one side voting against net neutrality, as they believe it to be exactly what everyone needs and the other seeing it as a breach of their right to freedom of speech.
The definition of Net Neutrality is the principle that internet service providers should enable access to all content and applications regardless of the source, and without favoring or restricting access to certain products or websites. If this principle were to be repealed, the government will decide what is put on the internet and you would have to pay to access some websites or apps, or internet providers might just block access to particular apps. I agree with the fight to defend net neutrality because the internet is an important source of information. If net neutrality were to be repealed, we would have limited access to information. This article is important enough to share in the news because the news websites could be blocked because of the things that they report on. For example, someone with a higher authority may want a news network blocked by the news they report. I believe this is textbook worthy because this is a problem that could, in a way, affect the First Amendment such as freedom of speech and freedom of the
Throughout the last decade, the idea of Net Neutrality has been the topic of many debates. Net Neutrality is the idea that Internet service providers should not be allowed to block their users from any content regardless of its source. The Debate is still continuing in 2017 with the F.C.C planning to repeal Net Neutrality and allow internet providers to completely regulate what their users can see and charge the users extra for “luxuries” such as social media, messaging, email, and music. There are two sides of this argument, one side believes that Net Neutrality should be taken away, while others believe that it is unfair for the Internet providers to have the right to take away the access to any content. Internet providers should not be allowed to control what content one can view when surfing the internet.
With the thought of American citizens being in control of their lives still in mind, it seems that the government is truly trying to tell its citizens how to live, since the repeal of internet neutrality would affect the free market system in negative ways; as a result, people’s financial lives would also be affected in negative ways. For example, according to page 15 of Alan Joch’s article, “Debating Net Neutrality,” internet service providers could do something similar as companies like Google in which they can charge advertisers to show certain results when a person looks up something similar to their focus. If net neutrality does come to an end, then situations like that will indeed happen. Therefore, net neutrality needs to be maintained because those situations would disrupt the economic system and the supposed fairness that is guaranteed by it. It would allow for the wealthier companies to further present their services and leave the smaller competitors in the dark. And, because internet neutrality’s repeal would allow internet providers and the government to essentially spy on everyone, “Various types of analytical applications could give broadband providers an efficient way to slice and dice their customers’ usage data, and thus gives ISPs an opportunity to argue that they’re able to place ads as precisely tuned to individual users’ interests as those inserted by search companies” (Joch 15). That statement further proves as to why ending net neutrality is a bad idea. It shows that not only will the government and the wealthy business people that run the internet know what everyone is doing, but it also shows how they would practically control the economy by choosing whether they want to show certain business’s ads or not. And, what is even worse is that they will have control of what is seen, and they can claim that the results they show are unique to the person and what they have looked up, which essentially leaves smaller competitors without hope. Now, according to Timothy J. Tardiff, in his article, “NET NEUTRALITY: ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF MARKET DEVELOPMENTS,” the end of internet neutrality would be a positive thing because people would have the option to pay for better options or services when it
I am Aric See and I am a senior in the Weidner School of Inquiry at Plymouth High School in Plymouth Indiana. Net Neutrality is a very important issue facing the United States, with many Republican members of Congress opposing the FCC’s Open Internet Order and the reclassifying of broadband to Telecommunication Services from Information Services. The members of the GOP who are completely against the Federal Communication Commission’s (FCC) reclassification, and attempts to keep the internet free, give many reasons that are simply not true, such as the FCC’s regulations will destroy the free nature of the internet. Because of the attempts by Congressmen with the GOP to fight the regulations, many Americans, especially small business owners that use the web as a base, feel that their equality and freedoms on the internet will be
Net Neutrality is essential to our everyday lives, and it is perilously close to being repealed on December 14th by the FCC; but if more people take a stand in support of Net Neutrality, we can preserve the free internet. Net Neutrality needs to be saved because it protects free speech, free trade of information and services, and the privacy of our data. This is an issue that concerns all citizens regardless of political affiliation, but lawmakers have made it a fight between the two parties. Most people did not care about Net Neutrality or even know what it is until fairly recently, but recent events regarding it's likely repeal have turned the public’s attention towards it.
The emergence of the Internet and the World Wide Web brought upon a medium of communication with a range of opportunities for the world. However, this medium is, in due course, subject to the control of a few major companies. The enigma of information flow is the central concern of net neutrality. Consumers, competition and network owners would benefit directly from the regulation of network neutrality because it would provide a positive impact to those parties as well as provide equality.
The concept of network neutrality (more commonly referred to as net neutrality) has been a fixture of debates over United States telecommunications policy throughout the first decade of the twenty-first century. Based upon the principle that internet access should not be altered or restricted by the Internet Service Provider (ISP) one chooses to use, it has come to represent the hopes of those who believe that the internet still has the potential to radically transform the way in which we interact with both people and information, in the face of the commercial interests of ISPs, who argue that in order to sustain a competitive marketplace for internet provision, they must be allowed to differentiate their services. Whilst this debate has
Around the world, several CEO’s of major tech industries are supporting the idea of keeping the internet free and provide access to information without any barriers. Recently, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg hosted a Q n A in which he mentioned his full support to Net Neutrality. His idea of providing the internet to the world using his initiative internet.org will help several under developed and developing parts of the world to get access to basic internet services and the content it provides. According to him the content should not be discriminated or limited by internet service providers like AT&T and Verizon. In countries where there’s no internet at all, it would be better to have some internet services so that there’s an establishment of connectivity rather than no internet. This is the reason the initiative of internet.org is important and can co-exist with net neutrality. He also believes that net
The Internet, a global computer network providing a variety of informational and communication facilities, is how we connect with long distance friends and family, how we receive an education, and how we earn our livelihoods. The Internet is a crucial part of our lives in this day and age, so we should be concerned with what happens to it and net neutrality. Merriam Webster defines net neutrality as the “principle, or requirement that Internet service providers should or must treat all Internet data as the same regardless of its kind, source, or destination.” Net neutrality ensures a fair playing field for entrepreneurship on the internet, using the internet, and censorship.
The term net neutrality has a lot of meaning behind it, at its core it means an open and free internet for everyone without discrimination from Internet Service providers (ISP). It means that all legal data on the internet must be treated equally and can not be sped up, slowed down or blocked for any reason including monetary compensation for increased speeds also known as “internet fast lanes”. It means that the internet must remain a level playing field with a low barrier for entry to keep the internet the place of business and innovation it is today. It means that the internet must remain a place of free speech without ISP deciding what content can be viewed by the people.