Experts are wondering whether there is a bright side to the Federal Communications Commission’s decision to kill a set of Obama-era regulations called the net neutrality rules.
The decision was met with fierce opposition both online and offline, with people warning of an Internet apocalypse and anarchy. However, many news outlets failed to present the big picture: major tech giants like Facebook, Google, Netflix, and Amazon will be the hardest hit by the decision.
In other words, the move will not only benefit Big Business like Verizon and Comcast, it will limit Big Business on the end of major content providers. It is not the first time, however, that a decision on net neutrality only half makes it to the public.
In 2015, when the federal agency passed the rules, the text of the new regulations was made public after it was voted into law.
Net Neutrality Critics’ Arguments
Net neutrality is a good thing in essence as Internet Service Providers are no longer allowed to discriminate content providers based on what fees they are willing to shell out. For example, it is a good thing to prevent Verizon from blocking access to competitors’ websites that offer lower prices for cellphones.
But net neutrality critics argue that such instances should not be regulated by the Big government. Instead, the free market should take care of it. Verizon would lose customers if they learned about the censorship.
Critics also claim that without net neutrality on the scene, new technologies like online “fast lanes” could emerge. For example, hospitals could buy Internet “express lanes” for their operating rooms that would prioritize tele-surgeons’ web communications over the Google searches of dozens of nearby folks looking for what President Trump has been lately up to.
Image Source: Wikimedia