Net Neutrality? Like What? About Whom?

Net Neutrality has been on many people's mind's for the last few years. I was in the library the other day working on another project and was telling one of my friends about the class I was in (COM 125). I was explaining to him about the blogs I have to write every week and told him I was writing my next one on "Net Neutrality." He immediately stated talking about the topic like he had to take an exam on it that day. I was baffled because I knew only a little bit about Net Neutrality--coming from another one of my previous classes taken with Trebor Scholtz in the Media Department. In this blog I set out to learn more about Net Neutrality.

Considering what is going on in the world today with the "Economic Crisis" I found some answers.

What are the current debate over network neutrality?

The current debate over network neutrality is basically over who gets see what and who can access what on the Internet. To me it all started just like how most political arguments start.... Money. How can we make another dollar?
I call this the "lemonade stand technique." Example. If Jimmy and Sally are selling Lemonade on the same street at the same price, how can Jimmy make more money than Sally? This works the same way with business and other conglomerate companies world wide. It's shallow, but remember its just business. If an internet company wants to restrict people from accessing some information it becomes more valuable? Right? (I'll give my opinion later).

When this effect happens in a large spectrum were numerous companies restrict people some people are left defenseless and have no access to information. Traditional allies and foes have rearranged themselves to form strange new alliances and divisions. Even the founders of the Internet and the World Wide Web -- including some who worked alongside each other -- are at odds over how to move forward (Jones, K.C., (2007).

The Internet may run on a phone line or cable line, but it shouldn't be argued over who has the better version. It's nonsense already people are judged from what they own and what they have. I can't leave my apartment without seeing acts of displays and forming trends. You aren't cool if you have this or you should have this because its the latest thing.

Whose interests are at stake, and what are these interests?

The people! The everyday common human being is at stake. Yes this answer sounds a little dramatic and every answer that's controversial and political seems to be the people first. Yes, I believe strongly that the people should come first anywhere around the world. Web 2.0 was built based on the common human being and their answers to the world. Not by NASA, or the FBI. People like you and me who shop at the same grocery store on the weekends.

(I just thought of a last minute contribution for this blog). What if you had to make a certain amount of money a year to have access to Facebook or Myspace? How many millions of people would be working overtime just to have it? How many people would it take to over-through the issue of dividing the Internet into High and Low SES networks. My guestimate would be between the number of people on Facebook and the number of people on Myspace. Interest like dramatic online chats and the little things (on the social network sites) that people use to access online would be like "waking a huge sleeping giant."

Why do you support or oppose network neutrality?

If I can speak liberally about what's happening with computers nowadays, and at the same time not being to flexible (considering were the money is coming) from I would have to support Net Neutrality. People have the right to their own educaiton and knowledge. When I was a kid growing up I heard constant happy stories of growing up, going to high school, and then going to college and grad. school. I was in a mind set (when I was younger) that when you grow up everybody goes to college. WRONG! What ended up happening was everyone I grew up with failed out of school or never went in the first place. This limited their ever-expanding process of education and information. Now just because not everyone can go to school based on whatever the reason may be: Money and finances, not enough devotion to go, other jobs, and military careers. I'm not saying any of these are bad--no way!! You are who you choose to be.

Here's where I am going to make my point. The people who DON'T decide to go to school and work alternative positions are giving back to the ever-growing support the ecomony. Information is still gathered and they still contribute a large amount to the world. The people who DO go to school give back the informatics and knowledge WE ALL REQUIRE TO FUNCTION AS A SOCIETY. Restricting the internet to certain people based on money and economic status is a terriable idea!!! It's like tying a knot in a fire hose, while the water is still running. Eventaully the restriction is going to overpower the knot and the hose will break.
We as a society have to work like the fire hose allowing the flow of information and contribution of information to channel and flurish so everyone has access to the power of ever-expanding answers.

***Jones, K.C., (2007). Information Week: Net neutrality debate remains contentious. (Accessed November 13th, 2008)

***Network Neutrailty. (2008). Wikipedia.com. (Accessed November 13th, 2008)