Activists for Net Neutrality like Mark Ahn believe that the internet should be treated with complete equality, for the sake of entrepreneurship and to protect small businesses. However, many Republicans who are supposedly for both of those topics, oppose the FCC debating the issue and would rather support the internet service providers. This was even further politicized after President Barack Obama announced that he would be in favor of creating the internet into a utility. This would protect the internet from inequality through providers. This announced polarized the debate, with Republicans coming out to firmly oppose any government intrusion into the internet. More reporters have written opinion pieces on the matter, for both sides. Recently, a Washington Post columnist created a piece that made the case for equality to support small businesses.
During the last few months there has been a lot of debate on whether the flow of information on the internet should be treated the same. Net neutrality is a concept where all of the data on the internet is treated the same, without any changes coming from the internet service provider. Advocates of net neutrality argue that this is the only way to ensure that the internet stays as a place where companies can remain competitive. Without net neutrality, internet service providers would be able to charge certain companies more than others, creating an imbalance and unfair internet which Gianfrancesco Genoso agrees with.
Recently, advocates of net neutrality have discovered that many of the people who are in charge of regulating the internet have actually invested a sizable amount of money in those companies. The investing of congress into any company is a tricky issue, as many times congressmen have knowledge about those companies that the general public does not. Surprisingly, it is actually perfectly legal for congress to invest in a company that they regulate. Many people argue that this creates an obvious conflict of interest, as the regulators would be more worried about the performance of the company rather than actually regulating the company.
Whatever the case may be, people are becoming increasingly aware of the government’s involvement with the communications industry. This is sure to be a hot issue for a long time.
After the speech of United States President Barack Obama, in which he stated earlier his belief that internet must not be restricted and he urged the Federal Communications Commission FCC to reclassify it as a utility comparing it with water and power, the senator Ted Cruz seems to feel another way.
Sen. Ted Cruz stated in his comment on Obama’s speech saying that considering internet a utility would mean that everybody would have the same internet speed, including the government.
This means that in terms of pricing the internet, this act would not only put the same price for everybody, but also would not restrict what internet brings to the houses of the Americans.
In terms of speed, every company has the right to choose or not to pay for extra or lower speeds and this is what makes internet different from being like other utilities, as it has information flowing, and that it is not needed for the actual flow of internet, but to the information it brings according to Jared Haftel.
However, the US restrictions should always be met regarding the internet, whether it was regarding goods exchanged or websites visited.
Cruz described Obama’s statement of internet openness and neutrality is just like Obamacare, but rather in terms of internet access.