Net neutrality is one of the most important, yet ambiguous debates of our generation. The Internet is something that impacts almost everyone from Generation Z to Millennials to Baby Boomers. Net neutrality is essentially the idea of the “free internet,” or the idea that information cannot be promoted or ignored based on providers’ personal biases. (Vox news) However, this idea saw a huge shift under the Trump administration. The so-called “Cabelization of the internet” took over, as ISPs (internet service providers) saw a huge privatization of their networks.  ISPs were able to charge extra based on the amount of data used, as well as promoting any information or streaming services they wanted. This leads to a huge abuse of power, and monopolization.

Net neutrality allows for people to innovate and change the Internet, as well as develop new  technology. As one source mentioned in the Vox video, had it not been for net neutrality, we may have all been updating our MySpace right now. A world without Facebook seems almost too good to be true, but think about all the ways society has improved because of new social medias. Instagram has sourced a huge uprising in photography and social media influencers. Twitter has seen a huge shift in the way we think of journalism, and Youtube and Vimeo have made filmmaking accessible to the masses. Net neutrality is so important because it shifts how the following generation accesses their information. Let’s be honest, most people check their phones for news nowadays. If news and information isn’t accessible because of monopolization, then there is a rude awakening in store for the millions of people who depend on the internet for their news.   

How does political policy impact the information it dictates? Is it really in provider’s best interest to have such a large stake in what they are providing? Think of it this way, if a lemonade company was in charge of sourcing the lemons it used for its particular lemonade recipe, what holds the company itself accountable for the quality of the lemons they purchase? Who’s to say Minute Maid won’t go for the cheaper lemons to cut overhead costs? How would this hypothetical change if the FDA suddenly allowed companies to omit their packaging labels on products? In this example, it is a near given that Minute Maid will always use cheaper ingredients in order to cut their costs. It is why Minute Maid uses high fructose corn syrup as a sweetener, while an organic brand might use agave or brown sugar. For lemonade, this is a fair game. The FDA is mandated to regulate the ways in which Minute Maid operates. The customer has a variety of choices. But in terms of internet? With a limited number of suppliers, all incentivized by the same policies and overheads, who can “check” them? Who acts as a watchdog when the government itself has an agenda? If the FCC eliminates net neutrality then who’s to limit ISPs power and how much they charge? In 2005, for example,the FCC dictated that ISPs are not common carriers, allowing multiple companies to bundle together to form the mere five we have in place today. This limits the number of choices consumers have. Almost ⅔ of Americans live in an area with just one high speed internet provider to choose from (2016 Broadband Report, FCC, Vox) If the Internet surges in price, or lowers in quality these individuals have little choice. They can either pay, or have no Internet, is this even a choice?

Equal accessibility is the cornerstone of net neutrality. It aims for consumers to be able to have a free choice between many options. It also allows newer companies to have a fighting chance. Without net neutrality, what we’re starting to see, is an abundance of vertical and horizontal integration. This means companies bundling together expanding both in their field and in others to make more money. For example, Verizon may absorb a local New York TV station, and add to its sizable TV network. Then, it moves into streaming services. Through its expansive hold in TV and Internet, it promotes its own streaming services and slows down others. Therefore, Verizon promotes itself (because of the loss of net neutrality) and continues to make more money by shutting down its competitors. Net neutrality is essential to our society as we know it. It promotes healthy competition, low prices, and fair policies. The way we create, learn, and live depends on a free internet, like it does a free press. The FCC must restore net neutrality in order for the public to remain educated at a fair price.