Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Net neutrality pros conclusion
Net neutrality pros conclusion
Net neutrality pros conclusion
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Net neutrality pros conclusion
Ashley Jack
Tuesday, December 12th
Net neutrality is an issue that has been brought up several times throughout the years but is currently resurfacing as Ajit Pai, chairman of the FCC, plans to have it repealed. Voting for this decision will take place on the 14th. Before delving too deeply into the topic, let's define net neutrality. It’s the principle that companies that connect consumers to the internet cannot block any content. They must make all content available at the same speed, meaning they can't slow the loading speed of one site over another, treating everything equally. If net neutrality is voted to be repealed, this will cause major issues for consumers in the months to come.
Net neutrality was established during the Obama Administration in 2015. It was put in place to set regulations and legal protections to help consumers, and set an equal playing ground for all internet providers.
Some agree with Pai that net neutrality is unnecessary and that it should, in fact, be repealed, while many others argue that net neutrality
…show more content…
is essential and must stay. Ajit Pai went on National Public Radio to state why repealing net neutrality would be the correct and most beneficial decision for the country.
Just like President Clinton said in 1996 when the internet started up, Ajit Pai agrees that it should be a free market-based approach to the internet. He stated, "companies like Facebook and Amazon and Google became global powerhouses precisely because we had light touch rules that apply to this Internet". He also argues that the FCC will still keep smaller companies safe. They will protect consumers to make sure that they don't let anti-competitive business practices go forward and that any practice that would affect the offering of a service has to be disclosed. Pai said the solution was not strict regulations from Washington, it's just more competition. He says Net neutrality was brought about due to hypothetical fears and the internet thrived before it and will thrive again without
it. While all of these arguments sound quite valid on the surface, few agree with Ajit Pai. According to BBC News, Pai “goes against 170 tech firms including Google, Amazon, Facebook and Netflix, which had, in July, protested strongly about plans to roll back the Obama-era net neutrality rules”. Before net neutrality was put in place in 2015, the internet was struggling. Several cases of power abuse were brought up all over. One example being what occured between Netflix and Comcast. Comcast had slowed data from Netflix to a crawl, forcing Netflix to pay Comcast and the problem was resolved. But what if Netflix were unwilling or unable to pay Comcast. It was without net neutrality that this was possible, and it is with net neutrality that this has been stopped from happening. This is also talking about a large company like Netflix, but the real threat is to smaller companies and start-ups. Small companies face enough struggles and barriers, and the last thing they need is for larger businesses to be allowed to buy faster delivery or speeds that newer, start-ups cannot afford. Another big issue is content blocking. Currently net neutrality prevents internet providers from blocking anything on the internet. If it is repealed, without net neutrality to stand in anyone's way, internet providers could block websites that they don't like, or could decide to block content from a political party that did not align with their political views. This could make propaganda more severe, having only news that internet providers want people to know be allowed, and having all opposing articles blocked from viewing. This could cause freedom of speech to suffer severely. Many argue that Ajit Pai is doing this partly because he was previously a lawyer at Verizon, making him partial to supporting larger companies, rather than supporting the needs of the common man. In total, keeping net neutrality is not only important, but essential. Repealing it could cause a major uproar from many smaller companies and average internet users. Net neutrality should stay in place as it keeps the internet at a consistent and even playing field, making everything fair for everyone.
In 2012, President Obama introduced the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program for young people who had been residing in the United States at least five years prior to the bill’s passing. DACA was the most significant provision from the Obama administration that aimed to help undocumented youth be integrated in the American society. It protected them from deportation and allowed them to obtain a state identification, work permit, and Social Security number. The immigrant communities celebrated this bill as it had been a long time since there was a significant change in the country’s immigration policy. However, the current administration and government pose a serious threat to the beneficiaries of the DACA program as well as
The NSA is a U.S. intelligence agency responsible for providing the government with information on inner and foreign affairs, particularly for the prevention of terrorism and crime. The NSA maintains several database networks in which they receive private information on American citizens. The agency has access to phone calls, emails, photos, recordings, and backgrounds of practically all people residing in the United States. Started in 1952 by President Harry Truman, the NSA is tasked with the global monitoring and surveillance of targeted individuals in American territory. As part of the growing practice of mass surveillance in the United States, the agency collects and stores all phone records of all American citizens. People argue that this collected information is very intrusive, and the NSA may find something personal that someone may not have wanted anyone to know. While this intrusion's main purpose is to avoid events of terrorism, recent information leaks by Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor, show that the agency may actually be infringing upon the rights of the American citizen. Whether people like it or not, it seems that the NSA will continue to spy on the people of the United States in an attempt to avert acts of terrorism. Although there are many pros and cons to this surveillance of American citizens, the agency is ultimately just doing its job to protect the lives of the people. Unless a person is actually planning on committing a major crime, there is no real reason for citizens to worry about the NSA and it's invasion of our privacy. The agency is not out to look for embarrassing information about its citizens, rather, only searches for and analyzes information which may lead to the identification of a targe...
The North American Free Trade Agreement—NAFTA—was an important agreement signed between three countries—the U.S., Mexico and Canada. NAFTA played an important role between each of these countries’ relations with one another through imports and exports. Throughout the presidential elections throughout the years, NAFTA has been highly debated on whether or not it has helped benefit the economy of these countries or if it has caused a lot detrimental issues. NAFTA promised many benefits for these countries, but not all of their promises were carried through; many views across the political spectrum also have their indifferences about NAFTA.
On January 1st, 1994, a treaty that created the largest free trade area were signed into place by the trilateral of United States, Canada, and Mexico. NAFTA is a promise made by world’s most significant corporations claiming to create many high paying jobs and raise the standard of living in the US, Canada and Mexico. As we approach its 21st birthday, NAFTA now links 450 million people producing trillion dollars’ worth of goods and services each year. However, behind this seemingly good deal, it also created many underlying issues. Beginning with NAFTA giving corporation opportunities to move factories aboard to the lower-cost Mexico. Manufacturing aboard did not only outsourced American jobs, it also caused manufacturers that remained to lower
Although the net neutrality debate didn’t come into the spot light so long ago, it has sparked controversy in the communications world. This concept provides a positive impact to the consumers, competition and network owners/internet service providers. It broadens the aspect of equality, which the open Internet was first based on. The profound effects on the aforementioned players provide a supported purpose to regulate the notion of net neutrality.
Free trade is a policy that lifts all trade tariffs and barriers and thus encouraging the free movement of goods (imports and exports) between nations. Agreements to free trade establish free markets where countries can engage in trade in a free and conducive environment. This type of trade is made possible by free trade agreements made between countries. According to the International Trade Administration, these agreements help minimize barriers to exports form the US, protect their interests as well as enhance the rule of law in member countries. NAFTA is one of such agreements.
Net Neutrality requires to give everyone access to everything on the internet. This means that your internet provider won’t charge you for using specific websites. But with this, companies will have the ability to charge you for using basic things such as email, Spotify and even YouTube. Fast and slow lanes will also be included which may vary depending of what packages you paid for. But that is just the beginning, being that with this they will be able to control what you are able to see and not, ending Freedom of Speech in the
Under the US Patriot Act, or Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, I believe citizens have only been put in danger. The Patriot Act was created to keep terrorism at bay and to launch The United States of America forward. However, it has done nothing but set us back. How can we live in a country where everyone is a suspected criminal? I believe that The Patriot Act does not help control terrorism. Instead, it undermines us as loyal citizens and is a way for the government to abuse their power over the citizens. How are we really free as Americans when our government is keeping a very watchful eye on us? Almost too watchful. The government has access to almost everything. As much as I love being an American I don’t think the US Government is perfect. What if the the government makes a mistake? What if they are really accusing the wrong people? It looks as though the government is resorting to old tactics that will be discussed further in this essay. The Patriot Act is a faulty document that puts the lives of Americans at risk. I also believe that the Patriot Act was put together way too quickly after the tragic event the stirred the nation and brought fear to many peoples hearts on September 11th, 2001. We all believed that our nation had fallen to the ground and there was no way of coming back. However, the government drew up The Patriot Act 45 days after the attacks. Congress seemed to have forgotten the constitutional rights that we were given by our founding fathers a long time ago. The Patriot Act goes against numerous constitutional rights that we have. This including our first, fourth, and sixth amendment rights. As one of the founding fathers, Benjamin...
The U.S.A Patriot Act, which stands for Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, was an act of congress that was signed by President George W. Bush in October of 2001. The act was in response to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack. The act is meant to help government agencies identify and prevent possible terrorist attacks and sponsorship of terrorist groups (Justice, 2015). The law has many pros, but as well countless cons. Some of the pros of the Patriot Act are it assist’s law enforcement in their investigations of terrorist activity, it speeds up investigations on terrorist activity, and it increases security measures. The cons of the act are the amount of authority
These types of montitoring have a good side and a bad side. The Patriot Act is an Act of Congress that was signed into law by President George W. Bush in 2001 after 9/11. Its backronym, U.S.A. P.A.T.R.I.O.T., which stands for "Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001.
The debate of Tim Wu and Christopher Yoo is about whether keep network neutrality. The Network Neutrality is about principle “non-discriminatory interconnection”, it refers that all users of the network should be received equal treatment. The Tim Wu is a supporter of network neutrality, he states the internet more like a highway rather than a fast food restaurant, so it should remain neutral. Because basic on the transportation and communication network should within scope of public interest, not on the individual difference. But the Christopher Yoo as a opponent thinks even if deviations the network neutrality there will not be necessarily damage users and innovation and then he suggests an alternative approach called “network
Tim Wu is known as “the father of Net Neutrality” for first coining the term “Net Neutrality”. He is a professor at Columbia Law School and the director of the Poliak Center at Columbia Journalism School. He commonly talks about other topics such as copyright, private power and free speech. Wu believes that net neutrality can prevent companies and carriers to offer “special” treatment to one specific provider instead of another. According to Wu, Net Neutrality benefits anyone in some way and believes that Internet transparency is critical because carriers fail to tell what services they provide for the user. At the core of Net neutrality, there is a free speech principle. It allows speakers and innovators to reach people that they would not
September 11, 2001, the day terrorism exploded. Across the country a terrorist group called al-Qaeda coordinated four separate attacks against the U.S. in just one day. The attacks left nearly 3,000 dead and double that amount injured. The American government had to respond in some way. Thus, The USA Patriot Act was born. However, in accordance to the U.S. Constitution, the act doesn’t quite fit the bill. The Patriot Act enables unconstitutional and unethical encroachment upon American citizens. Within this essay I will explain the Patriot Act and apply certain amendments to it in an effort to evaluate its level of constitutionality.
Net neutrality was the big talk towards the end of 2017. Taking away net neutrality would cause chaos in my opinion. Making schools and other organizations pay to use technology only discourages them from doing so which is a major step backwards in such a technological point in time. The world is constantly creating new ways to implement technology to our everyday lives and charging us to do so is not a step in the right direction. Saying that getting rid of net neutrality will do away with discrimination is absurd. Discrimination was around way before the internet was but instead we once again have one political party trying to undermine the other by playing the victim. I do agree that it isn’t right that such huge corporations such as
The net neutrality debate has risen once again and taken the country by storm. Supporters of net neutrality - the concept of a completely free and unbiased internet - and the supporters of a regulated, or tiered internet system, that would make people pay for faster internet or faster access to certain services go back and forth constantly. United States Congress and the Federal Communications Commission have differing stances on this issue, along with plenty of American consumers. Governing broadband poses internet service providers with the ability to slow or speed up internet access based on how much people pay for the service. To stop this from happening, net neutrality supporters have made it their mission to attempt to keep a free internet by fighting these restrictions.