Political Rant

For the most part, I try to stay out of politics, but there are a few topics that will really light a fire in me. One of them is anything regarding the wonderful world-wide web.

You have have heard that the Net Neutrality Act was shut down in January this year in a lawsuit between Verizon and the FCC. What does this mean for you? The Net Neutrality Act (a terrible name for it) states that your ISP (the company who provides you internet) has to treat all internet traffic equally. It means they have to allow you to access YouTube, CNN, Fox News, Amazon, and any other website you wish to visit on an equal basis. It means they can't charge you MORE to access those sites and it means they cannot charge the company MORE if they receive extra traffic (*note). This could mean internet connections might end up like TV channels. You pay extra for "premium" websites like Amazon, HBO, Netflix, Youtube, etc. Or

The FCC commissioners have finally released statements on removal of Net Neutrality - and not necessarily in favor of it. They all keep saying the internet will be "open and free", but how is that possible if your ISP can decide what websites run at the speeds you're paying for and which ones don't? Verizon has ALREADY been caught slowly Amazon and Netflix users down. Last I checked, I already pay a hefty sum each month to the rank 16 company on Fortune 500's list (at the time of this blog post). Business users pay more for better service and extra bandwidth. Why can Verizon now charge them MORE for speeds they already have? Why is Verizon punishing successful companies or companies it does not support? This is the same as a phone company charging extra to hear the voice of a person from another phone company clearly. 

The FCC Commissioner Tom Wheeler even mentions reclassifying the internet as a telecommunications service, but says the FCC will do it "only if warranted," effectively dodging the problem.

http://www.fcc.gov/document/statement-fcc-chairman-tom-wheeler-fccs-open-internet-rules

FCC Commissioner Matthew Berry discouraged the idea of the Net Neutrality Act, saying that the internet was free and open before Net Neutrality and will continue to be free and open after. I refute this. The Net Neutrality Act was passed in 2006, before the internet was used by the common person (**note) for more than e-mail. I recommend sending him an e-mail setting him straight.

http://www.fcc.gov/document/commissioner-pai-statement-fcc-internet-regulation

FCC Commissioner Mike O'Reilly has stated that there is no evidence that consumers are not able to access the content of their choice. While this is technically true, there is evidence that certain websites have become difficult to use due to the slow speeds. Verizon has been slowly Amazon and NetFlix, as mentioned above.

http://www.fcc.gov/document/commissioner-oriellys-statement-open-internet-announcement

The concern here is not necessarily increased charges from your ISP. The concern is that charges will rise for the business websites and news websites you visit, therefore costing the consumer more through the rising costs of the businesses. Sometimes, government regulation is important. I believe in an open and affordable internet. If you have time, please send e-mails to the commissioner's linked above!

(*note) - ISPs already get around this by charging companies for bandwidth packages. Companies usually pay for extra servers to keep their speeds high. Without Net Neutrality, your ISP can decide that they can charge EVEN MORE for them to keep those speeds high. They could charge Amazon more per server than they charge Barnes and Noble.

(**note) - when I use the term "common person" I am referring to the chronic Facebook user, middle-aged folk who can barely use a smartphone and the elderly. There were people who were pirated and who were online gamers, but they were in the minority.