Net Neutrality, Article Review Example

In the article “Future of Internet debate ignored by media”, Elliot D. Cohen examines a large debate concerning the future of Internet. According to the author, supporters of “network neutrality” program try to implement a new concept of Internet usage. For instance, they fight for passing a “legal mandate forcing cable companies to allow Internet service providers (ISPs) free access to their cable lines (called a “common carriage” agreement).” (Cohen) Secondly, their goal is to protect users from unlawful screening or interrupting Internet content.

Carefully analyzing this issue from the viewpoint of the person who does a lot of shopping, research, and communication online, I am sure that “net neutrality” is a positive campaign initiated by the government. Considering the facts discussed in this article, if “net neutrality” is properly handled, it would definitely mark a new stage of Internet development. If government, not the cable companies, regulates cable lines, it will eliminate all extra fees applied by many private corporations. Prices for the Internet services will be lowered and, therefore, more people will get constant and cheap access to the global network. Additionally, Elliot D. Cohen shows that some private cable companies can implement the politics of screening and filtering Internet content for their own benefit or some other purposes. For instance, Cox Communications, AT&T, and some other American were accused of applying various Internet services limitations. Government control over ISPs and cable companies will eliminate any kind of discrimination by allowing users to get adequate information and Internet companies to compete fairly with one another. Global network is itself a new developing market; therefore, government should support interests of ordinary users and buyers.

However, current government politics towards Internet development has shown that it supports neither the cable companies nor the users. In fact, “the House rejected legislation (HR 5273) that would have prevented phone and cable companies from selling preferential treatment on their networks for delivery of video and other data-heavy applications.” (Cohen) Secondly, it has also passed COPE Act, which enabled cable companies to choose only richest districts. Therefore, government has only created another kind of discrimination. From the perspective of ordinary buyer, such approaches differ from the initial meaning of “network neutrality”. For instance, while developing more expensive and high-speed Internet lines in the rich areas, cable companies discriminate people from the poor districts, who will not get the same access to the Internet, which is supposed to be free.

In conclusion, I would like to state that “network neutrality” program could become a good step forward to modernize the very concept of Internet. However, government regulations should support the interests of users, as they are the “customers” of Internet “market”. Internet is a public network. Therefore, all attempts to somehow monopolize it should be restricted.

Works Cited

Cohen, E. 2005. Web of Deceit: How Internet Freedom Got the Federal Ax, and Why Corporate News Censored the Story. Future of Internet debate ignored by media. May 11, 2009. <http:/ /www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/1-future-of-internet-debate-ignored-by-media/>