One morning as you're sipping your cup of morning coffee and typing https://news.google.com into your browser, a message pops up on your screen from your broadband Internet Service Provider (ISP) stating that they've blocked all access to Google until further notice. You shake your head in disgust and decide to stream a live news channel to catch-up on what's happening in the world. Frustration builds as the video and audio jitter every few seconds - the stream is completely incomprehensible. A small message in fine print appears on the bottom right of your television, informing you that the broadband provider has throttled news streaming channels and Netflix, and that perhaps you should purchase and install a few cable boxes for uninterrupted entertainment – for a “low” and “special” price of $54.99 per month for one year, plus $9.99 per month per rented cable box. You receive an e-mail from your ISP later that day detailing how data caps will be imposed on your account because you have above average bandwidth utilization. As you silently scream in your head, you muse whether you should have educated yourself and participated in that nerdy internet debate before the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to repeal net neutrality rules in 2017. You recall a recent quote from Massachusetts Representative Andy Vargas, "The internet is an essential service just like water and electricity. We need to make sure we provide the same kind of protections for consumers" (Wade, 2021). It dawns on you that in this day and age of technology, net neutrality must be restored to preserve an open and fair internet.
In the early 2000s, Tim Wu, a law professor at Columbia University originated the term "net neutrality" in a paper referencing online discrimination by broadband providers like AT&T and Comcast. Online discrimination in this context refers to blocking websites, software, and services, throttling speeds based on provider preference, or the monopolistic requirement of purchasing or renting provider-specific hardware (for example, wireless routers and cable modems). Net neutrality is the idea that all internet content should be considered equal, “regardless of content, user, platform, application, or device” (Kenton, 2021). After a decade and a half of enforcing piecemeal regulations that were often struck down by the judicial system, the FCC passed a comprehensive net neutrality order in 2015 “preventing the blocking or prioritization of any internet traffic”, however, it was later repealed in 2017 “freeing broadband providers to block or throttle content as they see fit” (Finley, 2020).
Imagine a scenario where the initially cash-starved startups like Friendster, Myspace, Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, and Netflix had to pay additional fees to ISPs for a more robust infrastructure that allowed speedier delivery of their content to end-users. These startups may have never taken-off. Funds would have been diverted to unreasonable broadband demands rather than being used for innovating and creating applications or streams for world-wide communications. Net neutrality limits the competitive ruthlessness of broadband companies and ensures that small, garage-based like startups have as much equal footing as the large conglomerates – as it relates to the speed and quality of its internet-based traffic. Disruptive technologies that create new markets and thereby innovation must not be stifled.
There are several internet-based services and applications that we may consider essential: e-mail, online banking, online shopping - which has become a lifesaver for many since the COVID-19 pandemic began in early 2020, virtual learning, and working from home or remote. Without net neutrality regulations, ISPs can charge additional fees for accessing these critical services. In this terrifying scenario, why not switch to another broadband provider? According to the Profiles of Monopoly: Big Cable and Telecom report by the Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), "83.3 million Americans can only access broadband through a single provider" (Mitchell & Kienbaum, 2020). Preserving the unrestricted access of these essential services is imperative to the well-being and survival of our citizens.
The First Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees freedom concerning expression. Net neutrality supports this tenet. Whether or not broadband companies agree with the content that's travelling through their infrastructure to reach end-users, net neutrality regulations required that the broadband providers treat the content equally. Without these rules in place, ISPs can eliminate any voices they deem unsuitable by refusing the allow that traffic to propagate through their networks. Limiting freedom of expression is an unacceptable scenario no matter the medium.
Opponents of net neutrality claim that regulations limit innovation at the broadband provider level. Investments in internet services infrastructure would be reduced, which may result in less access for consumers and higher costs. This claim is somewhat debunked since “the FCC’s own industry-funded research has shown that although investment fell by 2% in 2015 and 3% in 2016 while under net neutrality rules, many of the largest ISPs increased innovation spending” (Shepard, 2021).
A more poignant argument by broadband providers is that pornography and otherwise objectionable content that is rampant on the internet could potentially end up in the hands of minors. Firewalls and traffic-blocking software may not be enough to prevent the consumption of these offensive materials. ISPs argue that websites should be blocked at the network or infrastructure level. While this may be an entirely valid argument, broadband providers themselves must not determine what should or should not be blocked. Oversight must be exercised by elected officials or regulatory bodies.
Consumers in the 21st century should not have to worry about unfettered access to content. Rags to riches success stories abound in large part due to the free and affordable access to information shared on the internet. Whether steaming a video on how to replace a malfunctioning washing machine, conducting research using Google Scholar, or watching and mimicking the latest Tik Tok dance videos, our lives are intertwined with the bits and bytes that dance through cyberspace. The infrastructure or “pipes” that data flow through must remain unencumbered by greed, biases, and politics. We must all do our civic duty and reach out to our representatives to preserve the openness of the internet.
References
Finley, K. (2020, May 05). The WIRED Guide to Net Neutrality. Condé Nast.
Kenton, W. (2021, May 23). Net Neutrality. Investopedia.
Mitchell, C., & Kienbaum, K. (2020, August 12). Report: Most Americans Have No Real Choice in Internet Providers. Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR).
Shepherd, A. (2021, April 27). The pros and cons of net neutrality. IT Pro.
Wade, C. (2021, February 22). Massachusetts Lawmakers Push to Ban Data Usage Limits. The Eagle-Tribune.