Net Neutrality: It won’t work

A+decision+should+be+coming+by+the+end+of+the+month+on+the+controversial+issue+of+Internet+neutrality.

wordstream.com

A decision should be coming by the end of the month on the controversial issue of Internet neutrality.

Jeremy Wilson, Student Contributor

“In ten years, do you expect to have the same quality of internet service?”

My answer is a resounding no. Actually, just about anyone who hasn’t been lying under a rock would say as much. Progress has been the hallmark of technology in our country for the past few decades after all. Yet, there exists the all too real possibility that this nightmare scenario could come true.

The issue at hand is internet neutrality and it could pass into law as soon as the end of February. The term itself simply means that internet companies should treat all data the same, meaning that it all will be charged at the same rate regardless of how much bandwidth it uses (think of that as the difference between streaming a line video and viewing a webpage.) Also, companies cannot change individuals or companies (Netflix, twitter, etc.) more or slow down curtain services. Sounds great right? We can watch Netflix all day without getting charged extra. Yet, there’s just one problem. Would anyone want these rates to remain, even when a higher quality service could be available at a lower price? Me neither. Now, let me explain where I’m coming from.

If the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) elects to implement full-scale net neutrality, it will reclassify ISP’s (internet service providers) as “common corners,” in the same vein as gas and electric companies. These are designed to ensure that some service is provided to all. This works will enough for energy companies, motivations are slow and move at the pace at which the government works.

However, removing an entry from the free market system stage hates its growth and in the long run, hinders it from keeping up with the times. ISP’s have and continue to make large strides, especially in the area of affordability. In the not-so-distant future (without being weighed down by the government red tape of course.) Internet that is much faster than it is. How it could be offered at a fraction of the cost?

Now, that only deals with my primary objection to net neutrality as a government policy. These last two words, “Government policy,” address the other. Under the proposal, ISP’s would be regulated under Title II of the Communication Act, just as gas and electric companies are. One provision under this act allows the FCC to monitor backend desks between ISP’s and third party entities (again, the Netflix’s and Twitters of the world) rather than banning them. The standard for such judgment? Whether or not the FCC believes they are “just and responsible.”

Now, I’m not trying to group myself with ultra-conservation types who are against any type of government regulation in business sectors. I merely own suspicious of an appointed, not elects, commission policing the internet in the best interest of an electorate they owe little, if any, allegiance to.

So in the end, I guess my argument comes down to one of protecting the ideas by which I feel the country should be governed. In my opinion, the government should stay out of areas involving the technology that far out paces it, although I understand the execution is a different matter. As for me, I’ll take the next motivation any day of the week. Someday, a day that is not too far away, that new high-speed internet will be cheaper then what we have now.

If only we let these ISP’s do their job and innovate.