Let’s talk public policy! (Not partisan politics—there’s a difference. ;))
Every time you browse a website, your Internet service provider (ISP) acts as an Internet “middleman”, transferring data between you and the website (in simple terms). Because all Internet data passes through the ISP, ISPs have great power over the Internet. They can see which websites you’re browsing, change loading speeds, and block individual websites.
Here are some of my responses to some arguments against net neutrality:
Net neutrality is the regulation of ISPs, not the Internet itself. With net neutrality, ISPs are treated like utility companies (electricity, water, etc.).
Users can choose to not use websites. But with limited ISP competition (some areas of the US have only one provider, like Comcast), it’s hard for consumers to avoid an ISP. In addition, consumers are already paying for Internet service, so charging consumers extra or collecting consumers’ data seems excessive.
Without net neutrality, an ISP could charge a service like Netflix for faster speeds. These prices may be passed onto the consumer. Also, smaller websites that can’t afford it will be at a disadvantage.
Without net neutrality, ISPs could slow down websites they don’t like and collect detailed browsing data about Internet users.
The Internet was designed to be a free and open place to share information without fear of censorship or surveillance. I support net neutrality, because we need an Internet where all users and websites are treated equally.
