What is Net Neutrality and Why Should You Care About It?

OBERLIN.COM recently posted a news link – GOP Leader John Boehner Vows To Eliminate 'Net Neutrality' – which cited new regulations as a "…government takeover of the Internet."

Referring to the FCC, Boehner says that "Right now, freedom and free expression are under attack by a power structure in Washington populated with regulators who have never set foot inside a radio station or a television studio… Network neutrality, they call it. It's a series of regulations that empower the federal bureaucracy to regulate Internet content and viewpoint discrimination.”

Wow! That sounds ominous.

However, to me, this just didn’t seem to pass the smell test. With a little research I found that “Net Neutrality” simply means that all Internet content of the same type (such as videos, for example) must be treated alike and move at the same speed over the network and that the owners of the Internet infrastructure cannot discriminate.

Without “Net Neutrality” regulations, your Internet provider isn't required to give equal access to every Internet-based service. They could give preferential treatment to some sites, while slowing down or even blocking others – thus limiting your ability to enjoy the content of your choice.

I’m not a communications expert, but it seems to me that “Net Neutrality” is a good thing. Representative Boehner says that he and the Republican majority in the House were committed to fighting the new regulations, and that "There is no compromise or middle ground when it comes to protecting our most basic freedoms."

Umm... What?

I obviously was missing something here. Who would benefit by lifting “Net Neutrality” regulations?

Well, the clear answer is big business. By controlling Internet accessibility, the major service providers would have the ability to generate more revenue by manipulating rates based on content. Interestingly, in 2010, Representative Boehner’s campaign committee received over $322,000 from the communications/electronic industry and over $77,000 from AT&T alone (1).

You don’t have to be a Phi Beta Kappa to connect the dots on this one.

I certainly have no problem with the concept of “for profit” business. However, none of us should be happy with the prospect of large telecommunication conglomerates limiting, or in any way impeding, our accessibility to Internet content. If corporate coffers are not full enough, then raise everyone’s rates. Don’t impose an artificial censorship based on greed.

Senator Franken said it best, "It's about maintaining the architecture we have, which has created all this innovation and which doesn't favor the big corporate interests over individuals and small innovators, keeping it the free zone that it is."

Something with which John Boehner apparently disagrees.