Across the web, woes of dismay sounded out today as a US Federal Appeals court struck down the Federal Communications Commission’s Open Internet Order, an order designed to guarantee that consumers would have fair, equal access to content on the Internet. That order is called Net Neutrality.
Net Neutrality is designed to prevent Internet Service Providers from artificially slowing, or altogether blocking, websites, services and businesses from using the Internet. They can force the likes of Netflix, Hulu and YouTube, huge bandwidth consumers across the US, to pay incredibly high licence feed in order to deliver their content to consumers at uncapped speeds or beyond certain terabyte limits. Of course, these licence costs will, ultimately, be passed onto us consumers.
As a result, publications everywhere are predicting a very dismal future for those of us who enjoy unbiased, uncontrolled access to the content we choose for ourselves. Craig Aaron, the president and CEO of Free Press, predicts companies will rush to change the Web and line their own pockets at our expense — creating new tolls for app makers, expensive price tiers for popular sites, and fast lanes open only to the few content providers that can afford them.
When the Internet gained consumer popularity, commercial ISPs popped up everywhere to let consumers and businesses connect to the Internet as they wished. Back then, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) didn’t impose any Net Neutrality regulations. That’s right, up until now, there has been no policing of Internet neutrality.
The draconian future that everyone seems to predict without Net Neutrality Regulation didn’t happen then. So why will it happen now?
The answer is money. The Internet, like any other media, is able to be bought and paid for, and the Internet is no longer a little money-maker on the side. The Internet IS the media. It is, increasingly, the dominant form of delivery for all news, all programs, all politics, all discussion, and this is the crucial moment where online history will choose its’ biggest fork in the road: freedom or control.
It seems that control has won. The fact that Verizon brought this lawsuit to strike down FCC’s Net Neutrality all but reveals the long term agenda of ISPs. There are a lot of big, powerful financial influences at play here.
ISPs are private companies. They’re bought and paid for, just like Fox News.
This goes much, much further than just blocking or charging more for content.
This has profound political implications.
If Time Warner doesn’t like a presidential candidate for example, it can block all online coverage in support of them, or artificially throttle all content in support of them to the point of frustration. Remember Obama’s hugely successful social media campaign? That very kind of “voice of the people” online grass roots campaigning is now under threat, thanks to politically biased ISPs cutting off candidates and politicians at the click of a mouse. Think it won’t happen? You have far too much faith in the ruthless tycoons who own the media.
If AT&T doesn’t like the message or content on a website, it can outright block it, or more realistically, throttle it to frustratingly slow, near-dial-up speeds so you’re not entirely sure why you can’t seem to read that important bit of news or watch that video. They don’t need a reason. They don’t need to explain themselves. It’s within their rights to choose the content they want to influence the consumer, according to the Federal Court of Appeals.
It doesn’t end there. Advertisements can also be blocked, under this law. I suppose it’s just a matter of time before Uncle Goog steps in and has something to say about this. It’s not just about their long-term vision for providing YouTube to consumers at attractive prices or under a sustainable free model. This law is ultimately to advertising detriment too; Google being the largest ad server on the planet. Why would companies bother paying bucketloads to Google if their content is being throttled or blocked at the ISP level?
The bottom line is, allowing unpoliced control of the Internet by ISPs to continue is actually as destructive as implementing the controversial SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) / PIPA (Protect IP Act) Internet Blacklist Legislation that failed in their past and current forms for violating the rights of consumers.
You need a Net Neutrality bill, America. You need this, constitutionally, to protect the freedom and equality enjoyed by not millions, but billions of people. If home turf fails to implement this and content is curtailed in America for political reasons, commercial reasons or whatever biased reasons ISPs see fit, the ripple effects of home censorship could have severe implications for those sites and their content in other countries, too. It’s not just your nation who’s counting on you, America, it’s the rest of the world.
Video: Watch what the Huffington Post thinks. | Net Neutrality Is Dead — Here’s How To Get It Back
The post “No” to Net Neutrality = Internet Control, the same as SOPA / PIPA. appeared first on Controversial News, Controversial Current Events | Intentious the Internet's Home of Controversial News.
