The importance of network neutrality was presented in a recent article submitted on the Benton Foundation website. Since the creation of the internet, American companies such as Google, Facebook, Amazon, Youtube, and others primarily make up the majority of the web. As the internet expands and develops, the “suffers” now are faced with choices. Should we allow for new companies to come in and alter the Internet or should we try to uphold what we currently have and the freedom it represents. Do we allow “entrepreneurial entry” or do we “impose new fees.” The write of the article argues that the FCC should ensure that principles of openness and fairness remain in the marketplace. Network neutrality is extremely important and we should make sure the internet remains a place in which competition, creativity, and entrepreneurial activity exist.
The FCC’s, Federal Communications Commission, main job is to make sure the Mass Media is serving the public interest. The public interest is usually defined as regulation of decency, children’s educational programming, multiplicity/diversity of voices, media ownership, and localism. As Kevin Maness’s manifesto says, “Media content should be as diverse as possible to reflect as many different tastes and perspectives as possible.” Therefore, the FCC has the role of making sure the Internet is a place in which many opinions and diversities are available. This can be shown in the variety of websites accessible to users, and the diversity of owners of those websites. In the past the FCC has mainly controlled the Internet by means of prohibiting certain obscenity, but in the future they may have to put more control on the ownership and structure of the Internet.
What if we had to pay for Facebook, or even worse for the Internet in general? What if we were charged to create this blog, or to upload our videos to Youtube? Would you pay to keep in touch with friends on Twitter or to search something on Google? The future of the Internet might just look something like the above scenarios. Do you think there should be more regulation when it comes to the Internet so this does not happen? What on your thoughts?
The FCC’s, Federal Communications Commission, main job is to make sure the Mass Media is serving the public interest. The public interest is usually defined as regulation of decency, children’s educational programming, multiplicity/diversity of voices, media ownership, and localism. As Kevin Maness’s manifesto says, “Media content should be as diverse as possible to reflect as many different tastes and perspectives as possible.” Therefore, the FCC has the role of making sure the Internet is a place in which many opinions and diversities are available. This can be shown in the variety of websites accessible to users, and the diversity of owners of those websites. In the past the FCC has mainly controlled the Internet by means of prohibiting certain obscenity, but in the future they may have to put more control on the ownership and structure of the Internet.
What if we had to pay for Facebook, or even worse for the Internet in general? What if we were charged to create this blog, or to upload our videos to Youtube? Would you pay to keep in touch with friends on Twitter or to search something on Google? The future of the Internet might just look something like the above scenarios. Do you think there should be more regulation when it comes to the Internet so this does not happen? What on your thoughts?
No comments:
Post a Comment