Net Neutrality in recent years has sparked a lot of attention on social media. People are expressing their opinions of the movement all over the internet. But what exactly is net neutrality? Net neutrality is the idea that all internet traffic should be treated equally. Meaning, that internet service providers (ISPs), like Verizon and Comcast, should not prioritize any content on the internet or charge more for faster internet access. Net neutrality ensures that the internet is open to all and creates an equal playing field. It allows for small businesses to compete with larger companies. Simply, net neutrality limits the powers of ISPs in order to preserve an open internet.
Net neutrality has had a long history in the US. In 2003, a law professor named Tim Wu wrote “Network Neutrality, Broadband Discrimination” in which he created the term Net Neutrality. Wu described how broadband services were abusing their power in the early 2000’s. In 2004, chairman Michael Powell of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), who are responsible for regulating all telecommunication services, created the “Four Internet Freedoms”. These principles stated what would be excepted of ISPs in order to conserve an open internet. These freedoms included: “freedom to access content”, “freedom to run applications”, “freedom to attach devices”, and the “freedom to obtain service plan information.” By following these principles, the FCC hoped that ISPs would become non-discriminatory against internet content.
Although these regulations were proposed they were not made official. Net neutrality laws were not instilled until 2010 under chairman Julius Genachowski. On December 21, 2010, the FCC passed its “Open internet order” which placed Powell’s principles into action and supported net neutrality officially. These rules clearly stated that ISPs cannot block or slow down internet data. However, ISPs were not too happy about this, these regulations limited the amount of money they could charge for their services.
In 2014 Verizon took the FCC to court. They argued that they were classified as an information service. Meaning, that under title I of the communications act of 1934, the FCC could not regulate them. However, the court decided that they were a common carrier and fell under title II which allowed for regulation. This discrepancy between ISP classification under title I or title II would start a long line of debate that would fuel the net neutrality movement.
Later in 2014 President Obama posted a video that exhibited his support of net neutrality and classifying ISPs as utilizes under title II. This statement forced the FCC and current chairman Tom Wheeler to reconsider their ISP classification. In 2015, the FCC released a renewed proposal of net neutrality laws that stopped ISPs from limiting access to websites and internet speeds.
However, as of December 2016, the FCC decided to repeal the laws of 2015, and end net neutrality under the new chairman Ajit Pai. Pai explained, that his reasoning was that ISPs found these regulations too severe. Within the last few months senators have been banding together in support of reversing the FCC’s decision. Under guidance of senator Ed Markey’s Congressional Review Act (CRA) senators are trying to bring their case before Congress in hopes of passing legislation to revive net neutrality.
In the meanwhile, government officials are taking matters into their own hands. They are displaying their support for the movement through social media platforms like twitter. Several officials are taking a constructive approach to preserving internet freedoms. Governor of Oregon Kate Brown, Californian Senator Scott Wiener, and Washingtonian Senator Jay Inslee posted on twitter that they has passed net neutrality laws in their states. While other states have pursued a more forceful approach for preserving net neutrality. New York state attorney general, Eric Schneierman, announced on twitter that New York would be joining with other states to create a multi-state lawsuit to defend net neutrality. Government officials realize the impact that social media has on legislation they are trying to engage with Americans to persuade congress.
Net Neutrality does not only effect ISPs and government officials it effects American citizens too. Without net neutrality ISPs can charge an exorbitant prices for internet access. Furthermore, they can create internet packages that will limit access to certain cites. Not only will this be extremely costly to people but it will not allow for fair competition,. If powerful ISPs favor one website over another, smaller businesses will not be able to thrive. Additionally, if the FCC cannot regulate ISPs than ISPs will be allowed to restrict content and limit the flow of internet traffic. This is more than an economic issue its one of civil rights. Under the first amendment American citizens are granted the right to freedom of speech and expression. By giving ISPs the power to control the content of which their users view they are compromising the basic American rights.
In light of the current debate on twitter I think the FCC will change back to title II. People are getting involved and protesting for net neutrality. Net Neutrality has become so much more than who controls the internet. Some people now view this as a human rights issue. Twitter users are livid with the FCC and are fighting to regain net neutrality; what they see as a human right.
Net neutrality impacts every aspect of our lives online. The fight for net neutrality is far from over. Governmental officials and citizens are banding together to preserve internet freedoms. By reimplementing title II they hope to preserve the internet as an open place for expression and communication.