Net neutrality is the principle that says all information flowing across the Internet should be treated equally. But with more people streaming data-rich video and playing online games, the Internet faces congestion concerns. Should carriers be able to sell multi-tiered access to heavy users? Should sites that generate massive traffic -- like Google and Yahoo! -- pay extra fees? The U.S. Government is examining Net Neutrality and its financial, legal and social implications. Do we need federal intervention to ensure fairness, or is this an issue for the market to work out?
The mystery about the debate over Net Neutrality is why there is a debate at all. For seventy years, the concept of not allowing telephone companies to discriminate in their treatment of their customers was enshrined in the Communications Act. It wasn’t until 2005 that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) decided to hand the keys to the Internet over to the telephone and cable companies.
Except for the telephone and cable companies, and their battalions of spokesmodels, surrogates and bought-off sock puppets, it’s hard to find someone who can argue with a straight face that the network operators should be able to manipulate the Internet for the benefit of one company or advertiser over another. And yet they do, under the guise of red herrings like “network management” while proclaiming their opposition to “excessive regulation of the Internet,” that would take away financial incentives to invest in broadband facilities.
Next Argument
Biweekly updates on new debates and experts
Please check your email to confirm your subscription.
© 2008 Opposing Views, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Opposing Views, Inc. is not responsible for the content posted on this website. Please view full disclaimer under Terms
Expert Verified
