The following is taken from ProCon.org, a nonpartisan site that discusses and provides context for controversial issues. Please take a side on the issue – do not try to argue both sides equally – in a short, 2-3 paragraph response. A full 5+ paragraph essay is not expected or required. Grades will be assessed based on specificity of responses, how well they address the topic, and how developed ideas are in this limited amount of space. You may write in first person (“I”) if you desire.
Net Neutrality
The net neutrality rules adopted in 2015 regulated the internet as a common carrier, the same category as telephone service, under Title II of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The FCC rules prevented internet service providers (ISPs) from blocking, slowing, prioritizing, or charging consumers extra money to access certain websites. For example, under net neutrality rules, Verizon could not speed up access to websites it owns, such as Yahoo and AOL, and could not slow down traffic, or charge extra fees, to other major websites like Google or YouTube.
On Dec. 14, 2017, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted (3-2) to overturn those net neutrality rules and reclassified internet service as an information source, rather than a common carrier.
Many state attorneys general filed suit against the FCC decision, and the US Senate voted (52-47) to approve a resolution to invalidate the decision. Unless overturned by courts or legislative action, the FCC’s removal of net neutrality rules will be officially implemented on June 11, 2018.
Proponents of net neutrality say it preserves free speech on the internet by preventing ISPs from blocking lawful online content. They also contend that ISPs should treat all internet traffic equally and be prevented from engaging in anti-competitive behavior such as slowing down or speeding up certain websites. In addition, they say that net neutrality protects consumers from being charged more to access certain websites, such as online video streaming services.
Opponents of net neutrality say that internet service should be free from heavy government regulation, and that the internet has evolved spectacularly over the last decades without net neutrality regulations. They contend that net neutrality lowers investment in needed internet infrastructure. In addition, they say ISPs should be allowed to charge extra fees to online content providers that use disproportionately large amounts of bandwidth, such as video streaming services.
