I hope my college-age bloggers are tuned in from all over, right now. I am about to tackle this concept of Net Neutrality and provide to you my personal stance, in less than 400 words. Please don’t underestimate the power of conversation and I hope that my post, at the very least, intrigues you to learn more about Net Neutrality and how it impacts you and the world’s access to knowledge.
Net Neutrality breakdown, 5 things you need to know:
- Currently, decision is being made as to rather or not the FCC will have regulation over the Internet.
- If the FCC gets regulation, everyone will have free and equal access – As it is now. Currently we do have Net-Neutrality and if FCC regulates the Internet, we will continue to have an open Internet.
- Currently the FCC does not have access to regulate broadband. However, if the Net-Neutrality stance wins the debate, they will have access! (Broadband is a fancy way of saying – you’ll get to keep that nice high-speed connection to all sites you visit.)
- If Net Neutrality loses the debate, you’ll have to pay extra for the sites you commonly go to or those in which you want to access faster.
- The Issue –If Net Neutrality loses the debate there will no longer be a thing as “exploring the internet” now that it’s limited – you shall only explore those sites that you paid for. Say goodbye to last-minute research projects!
With roughly 150 words left (I stick to my promises), I’ll breakdown my personal perspective on the issue of not having “Net Neutrality:” The long-term effect.
Recently, in a blog I wrote some time last week, I stated how cognitive dissonance impacts the news we seek on-line. In summary, when we look for news contents on-line most of us, intentionally or unintentionally, look for news sources that share our perspective or stance on a particular issue. We get this great sense of being able to applaud ourselves for picking the “right, logical perspective.” In reality, we’re limiting our perspective and creating this false black and white view of the world.
If FCC does not interfere to ensure “Net Neutrality” we have a bigger issue than that! The Mark Zuckerbergs of the world will not have the ability to be innovative, because they will not be able to afford it. People will begin to only pay for the sites that agree with their beliefs and perspective. The sights that have something different to offer will not even be in one’s sight. We’ll fall into this false sense of reality that the world only has one right answer, and all the sources we look at will be supportive of our own. Do you not see the harm in this?? I am Pro Net Neutrality because I care about being well-informed and I think knowledge and perspective is a resource everyone should be able to access.
I’m not saying you have to listen to a twenty-one year old from a small city. I’m saying that I hope you take advantage of the Internet to access useful perspectives and information on issues that affect you, like this one. You may not always have the privilege of doing so.