Let’s start with a simple definition: “Net neutrality” is a term popularised by internet users who oppose the increasing tendency among network owners (telecommunication companies) to tier or prioritise certain content on the network. Essentially, it’s founded on the idea that the internet needs to remain a level playing field.
Since its inception, the diversity and versatility of the internet have been its most important qualities. The fact that every user begins with equal access is what has allowed for the creation of everything from online support communities to fandom culture, social media campaigns to political movements. Sure, I could spend my entire Saturday afternoon reading articles on the New York Times site or watching Netflix, but the fact that I could just as easily consume free video content on YouTube or join an open conversation about a grassroots movement on an obscure forum serves to prove that an internet user’s experience is valuable because it is autonomous. Fundamentally, I have equal access to websites fuelled by billion-dollar corporations and websites run by individuals. This effectively is what the concept of net neutrality is all about.
However, this is something a lot of us take for granted. We assume system-wide restriction to internet access is an issue for North Korea, not North America. Unfortunately, that’s not true at all. In the US, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)’s most recent proposal would allow broadband providers to charge content companies for a so-called “fast lane” of service. Only websites that are willing to pay extra money to an internet service provider (ISP) will have their sites offered at a high speed.
What’s scary is that the organisations with the very power to choose whether to enforce net neutrality are likely the same people that would be benefitting most from a highly monetized system. The Internet Association, a lobby group that aims to unify America’s internet companies and users, has summed it up well: “Preserving the Internet’s neutrality ensures that it remains an engine for economic growth, innovation, and democratic values…. Broadband Internet access providers, however, have the incentive to discriminate and block Internet traffic. They also have the tools to carry this out.”
On Monday morning, President Barack Obama released a statement and video on the issue which makes the same demand as many demonstrators – calling on the FCC to reexamine their policies in favour of net neutrality. To have the White House backing such an action is a big deal; with the exception of the NDP and Green Party, Canadian political figures have remained largely silent on this issue. And while the epicentre of concern on this issue is currently in the United States, net neutrality is undeniably something Canadians also need to be concerned about.
Whether network access providers should have the power to be determining how their users use their service is a scary question to me. It’s something that has the potential to reshape the freedom that our use of the internet is based upon. I don’t know where this issue is headed, but there’s one thing I do know for sure – an internet that gives preference to large corporations, that favours wealthy content creators over anyone else – that’s not an internet that I want to be a part of.