This isn't going to be a whole
explanation on why net neutrality is a good thing. Rather, I want to
talk about the effects of what the next era of the Internet is going
to be. Of course it won't all be at once, but slowly we will see
changes from the way we browse the web to the way we communicate with
each other. The issue relates to freedom of speech and expression,
both of which certain people in high offices would sooner see
abolished, judging by what they've said. The internet was built as a
way to communicate and share ideas, knowledge, videos, pictures, and
in more recent years, memes. But now, the future is uncertain due to
the freedoms now granted to the companies who want more money out of
the poorest citizens.
The FCC does have regulations passed
between the 1990s and the 2000s pertaining to keeping the internet
free and open to the people. However, during this time, companies
were overcharging customers and even slowing down bandwidth depending
on the browser and even the location. People sued, and usually won
against the corporations. At the dawn of the 2010s, when the internet
culture hit its renaissance, a movement sprung up for net neutrality
– regulations that prevent internet service providers (ISPs) from
blocking access to websites and data if customers did not pay extra
charges. Barack Obama signed net neutrality into law in 2015,
following the FCC and Congressional votes to approve it. Since then,
no matter your provider, you see the same sites at the relatively (as
with anything) same speed as someone with another company. Fast
forward to the 2016 election, where Donald Trump actually said that
he wants to “shut off” parts of the internet to the American
people as part of his plan to stop ISIS – despite admitting that it
would infringe on freedom of speech. This would not be a bad concept
– limiting the purchase of domain names by known terrorist cells,
but that is almost entirely impossible, considering the internet is
not a land of law and order, much less is it designed to be country
by country access.
Now, the current FCC chairman, a
Republican working for Trump's administration has been outspoken
against net neutrality, saying it's bad for the companies. Because
they aren't charging people extra to go on Facebook, listen to music,
search on Google, or even read this very article. Of course there are
the other regulations and policies, but if net neutrality was voted
out with a 3-2 majority (voting on party lines because no matter what
you feel, the party – read Republican party – makes the real
choices here). It should also be noted that without regulations like
this, ISPs will be able to limit the websites people see, and much
like suggested ads, it's based on demographics. Rich customers who
pay for the premium services will be able to look for a good lawyer,
read up on workman's rights, apply for certain jobs, etc. But poorer
customers, who can't afford the extra, will get a very limited
internet. Essentially, if you'll pardon the comparison, it's like
EA's Battlefront II. You buy
it, you bring it home, load up the game, and lo and behold, you can't
play as Darth Vader unless you do one of two things: play for ten
hours straight a day for a week or two, or just buy all the lootbox
packs and spend over two thousand dollars on a video game. If you
aren't able to pay, you don't get to have all the features.
But
as with most things they do, the Republican party really knows how to
convince their base otherwise. By saying the companies won't actually
charge you, they'll keep their prices the same, or that sometimes we
have to sacrifice freedom of expression in the name of security (“for
a safe and secure society” to quote Emperor Palpatine), as well as
really pushing the narrative via Fox News and other right wing
sources, they can totally blind people to the reality that they are
not seen as real human beings by the current administration. This is
how the internet works in North Korea and China – heavily censored,
and in the case of the former, only certain people have access. We
won't see it all at once. Little by little, it'll load up slower,
data won't go through as fast, and then eventually a message - “To
access this site, please upgrade your service package.” The
companies would decide what we see and when we see it, which as we
can easily infer will be abused by CEOs being paid by government
officials to silence resistance.
I
won't go on for long about this. There is so much online and so much
to read about that it is impossible to summarize in an article like
this. The FCC voted it down, but Congress still has to vote. Several
states are suing the FCC to reinstate net neutrality, among them
Mississippi – because the Republicans screwed up so badly, even the
deep south is suing them for it. Everybody should get access to the
complete internet, regardless of provider, demographic, or package.
It may well come to a point where to apply for a job, you have to pay
your ISP more. So many things are connected to the internet, even
fifty dollar smartphones. Should one have to decide whether or not
they want to have an email so they can check for an important notice,
or eat? Should the poor get poorer trying to go on Reddit or Google
or Netflix, and the rich get richer by exploiting the poor?
Seriously, the current administration doesn't care about the regular
person, only the CEOs and boardmembers who lied, cheated, and stole
their way to governing our daily lives. Call your senators, your
representatives. Email, send a letter, anything. Tell them that these
freedoms are guaranteed to all Americans, and that the corporations
should not have any more right to block access than anyone else.