The concept behind net neutrality is that governments should not discriminate, on an individual basis, who should and should not have access to certain elements of the internet. This simple definition of what net neutrality is makes it sound like it is good, and it is when people don’t try to interpret the meaning of it for their own benefit. It essence, the benefits of net neutrality are for the individual people and not for the businesses, such as internet providers, who try to make a large profit by treating individuals differently. Businesses are forced to treat everyone equally in terms of the internet they provide.
The big downfall of not having net neutrality is that not every person will be treated equally. This means that certain people will not have access to the information that they request. This would result in people having less resources than others and eventually this can be detrimental to their life and success. It also means that internet providers would be able to choose who has access to less resources. This is unethical because there is no good justification for not providing people with certain resources besides the fact that it is profitable. There are arguments that explain why net neutrality is bad but they seem to be a cover up for that fact that not having net neutrality is profitable. One of the big arguments behind net neutrality is the fact that having it results in more control by the government. For the example, the Federal Communication Commision has the power to ensure that all internet access is evenly distributed correctly. This means that the government is forcing internet providers to do business on the terms of the government and not theirs. This reduces the rights the businesses have. This may sound like a big problem, but it is not unethical. It seems that, in this case, the government would be reinforcing laws that reduce the unethical decisions that businesses would make in order to increase their profits. There are people who believe that the internet should not be a right that everyone holds. The way they see it is like anything else. If a business is selling different quality types of a certain product, then the government should not be able to force them to sell only the best type. The government forcing businesses to conduct business in a certain way may be unethical if there weren’t any justification for the rules they impose. The justification is that everyone should have the same opportunities. This means that businesses can sell any product they want as long as they treat every customer the same. In other words, t some customers should not get a very good quality products while others can only get the bad or medium quality product. As a result of the arguments I have presented, it is easy to see how much having net neutrality outweighs not having it. Having net neutrality helps the individual while not having it benefits internet providing businesses. In some way, net neutrality is what people enjoy today.
3 Comments
5/3/2017 11:54:58 am
Net neutrality is such and interesting topic to me. I like how you raised the issue of government intervention: the government forcing businesses to provide or sell a certain product. In my view, government intervention is like playing with fire. It can be essential, but also very dangerous. In the case of net neutrality, I hold the belief that the government should do something to at least outline what companies can and cannot do. I think it is fair for internet service providers to offer varying internet speeds, but I don't agree with varying internet speeds depending on the content that is being viewed. Without a doubt, there is much more depth to the net neutrality debate and I hope to see more of it in the public arena in the months to come.
Reply
Angela Bomarito
5/11/2017 08:52:57 pm
Hi Salvador, I agree with Joshua's comment when he says that internet providers should be able to control things like internet speed, but when it comes to what content consumers are able to view, who gets to decide that? I also think that that should be where the government comes in, they should use the power that they have to be fair, not to invade privacy.
Reply
Fernando Madrigal
5/12/2017 06:21:07 pm
Hello Salvador,
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
|