Kaur 1

Mandeep Kaur

ENGL 133

Dr. Peters

21 November 2017

Freedom of Thought

Everywhere we turn, people are consumed by technology. On the subway, in the bus,

walking to our cars, between classes, even in the middle of conversations. News, social

media, and almost any piece of information is transmitted through some sort of technological

device, be it a phone, laptop, computer, or tablet. However, the internet is central to all forms

of communication and transfer of information that occurs with the aid these devices. The

internet is essentially a virtual meeting point for people all over the world to connect, share,

and learn with and from one another. In this day and age, some people would even equate it

with food and water in terms of necessity. The internet allows for us to learn about the world

and the people within it, while also enabling us to freely share a part of ourselves with

whomever we please. Unfortunately, however, this freedom that is often taken for granted is

on the verge of being compromised as Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are working towards

creating internet fast lanes for the highest bidders. Net neutrality, which refers to the idea in

which all forms of content are treated equally by ISPs, must be maintained to ensure equal

and unbiased access to information.

There are two main sides to the net neutrality debate, most people are for it, while

major corporations are pushing against it. Baltatescu, an independent researcher, explained

that this argument essentially boils down to whether market for internet access should be a

free market or whether some ISPs revenue should be prohibited in her piece The Economics
 Kaur 2

of Net Neutrality. If the internet becomes a free market, the fastest speeds will go to the

corporations that can afford it. That does not mean that small businesses or individuals will

not have the opportunity to get a spot, rather they will be all the way at the end of the queue.

In addition, their websites will take a significantly longer time to load, and anyone who has

ever used the internet knows that if a cite does not load fast enough, we go back and choose a

different one that does. Up until now though, there has been no bias as to which cites move

faster than others, and a stay-at-home moms cooking blog has the ability to load just as fast

as Facebook, Twitter, or Google.

Initially, net neutrality, or lack thereof, may not seem like a big deal. So what if I can

load my Netflix video or see my friends Facebook post faster than I can access some random

persons blog post? At first, even I though the same thing when I first heard about net

neutrality. However, the implications are far more detrimental if you look in the long term. By

paying for internet speed, only the wealthiest content providers (CPs) that can afford these

fees will be able to keep up. If this occurs, the internet will be more vulnerable to politics than

ever before, and the publics access to information will be pre-filtered with dominating

information. Furthermore, the profit motive supersedes any inclination toward public

benefit (Berghel), meaning that ISPs will continue to aid the most profitable CPs, regardless

of its manipulation of or negative effects on the public. Small businesses or startups will be

less likely to be accessed by the public, hindering their efforts to gain momentum and become

successful. Wealthy corporations will be able to provide better access and generate even more

profit, thereby becoming even wealthier in an endless cycle of power and control.

In addition to small businesses and startups, the research sector is solely dependent on

the lack of bias and requires an independent and fair playing field. Hal Berghel, from the
 Kaur 3

University of Nevada, explained just how detrimental of an effect political or corporate biases

could have on this industry. He stated, The reason publically funded research works so well

in this capacity is that it doesnt have to satisfy the parochial interests of government in

power. Berghel further explained how science must be unobstructed by partisan and myopic

interests, and how the governments primary role should be to nurture this unbiased process.

Net neutrality will secure the right for independent researchers and scientists to conduct their

trials, analyze their results, form their conclusions, and share their findings with the entire

world, without being bought out and manipulated in the process. If we dont secure a neutral

internet, the public will only be exposed to information that corporations or our government

feel is most advantageous and profitable for them. They will be able to regulate and

manipulate the information that we have access to, thereby controlling our ideas, opinions,

and actions.

Furthermore, profit motives not only benefit corporations that buy into this fast lane

but also ISPs who use it for themselves. Barbara van Schewick, a leading internet scholar at

Stanford warns how ISPs could promote their own versions of apps, like internet messaging

and telephony, while intentionally blocking or limiting customer access to competing services

such as WhatsApp or Skype (Anders). This means that not only will corporations be in

control of the content the public accesses, but so will ISPs. The internet will become a

monopoly that only the wealthy can afford, and in turn, the free internet as we know it today

will completely vanish. The information we access and applications that we utilize will be

pre-selected for us by corporations, our government, or Internet Service Providers. The free

access that we once had will instead be censored by wealthy institutions.

 Kaur 4

On the flipside however, there are some negatives associated with net neutrality. The

main argument vocalized by opponents is the idea that if content providers do not pay for

internet usage, then the costs associated with maintaining the internet will be placed onto

consumers (Ip). From their perspective, the internet infrastructure must be maintained

somehow, and that cost should be placed onto wealthy corporations, governments, and ISPs

that can actually afford it, rather than individual consumers who are generally more cost

sensitive. As a result, people that will not be able to afford this spike in internet fees will stop

using it, and internet usage will decrease. While this is a completely possible outcome if net

neutrality is secured, we also have to consider the costs imposed on individuals if the internet

becomes a free market. Internet maintenance fees are the lesser of two evils, as a marketed

internet could eventually transform our nation similar to that in 1984. If only the wealthy can

afford the content we can access, that the information and knowledge we receive and thoughts

and ideas that result from this information will all be a result of manipulation and control. As

a society, we will have only a superficial feeling of freedom and enlightenment on the

internet.

All in all, the internet needs to remain a free and open space for individuals to access

information and connect with the world. Net neutrality has few immediate implications;

however, the long-term effects will prove to be detrimental to our nation. If only the

wealthiest corporations or government can afford to control what individuals have access to, it

will compromise the legitimacy of research conducted, decrease the diversity of information

available, prevent small businesses or startups from evolving, and control our thoughts and

actions, both on an individual and societal level. In a world where the internet has essentially

become a necessity, it is more crucial that we secure our freedoms online than ever before.
 Kaur 5

Works Cited

Alleven, Monica. "Net Neutrality: Long-Term Implications Loom for Internet of

Things." FierceWirelessTech (2015) ProQuest. Web. 22 Nov. 2017.

Anders, George. "The Right Way to Fix the Internet." Technology Review: MIT's Magazine of

Innovation. 117.6 (2014): 28. Web.

BLTESCU, Ionela. "The Economics of Net Neutrality: Policy Issues." Knowledge

Horizons/ Orizonturi Ale Cunoasterii 6.2 (2014): 114-18. Academic Search Premier.

Web. 22 Nov. 2017.

Berghel, Hal. "Net Neutrality Reloaded." Computer 50.10 (2017): 68. Web.

Ip, Greg. "U.S. News -- Capital Account: Net Neutrality's Negatives." Wall Street Journal,

Eastern edition ed. Feb 26 2015. ProQuest. Web. 22 Nov. 2017.