Net Neutrality Hindered by Myths
The Net neutrality debate began in earnest in 2005 when then AT&T CEO Ed Whitacre proclaimed that Google was getting a “free ride” on his network. His answer to this perceived problem was lacking in imagination and forethought.
His answer was to rectify the issue of a “free ride” by charging companies who were already paying for bandwidth more money to ensure that their traffic would reach AT&T customers rapidly. This statement became a warning to consumers as well as content companies of what may lie ahead for the future of the Internet.
The myth of the free ride has pervaded every discussion on net neutrality since the beginning. Large ISPs like Comcast, Verizon and AT&T have popularized this myth and have used it to block consumer protection efforts.
It does not seem to matter how many times it is revealed that Google and others pay millions of dollars for bandwidth and their own infrastructure, the main players will still push this lie on the consumer and confuse them further.
Most consumers still do not understand how the Internet, bandwidth, FTTH, tiered billing or metered billing work. With this in mind it is understandable why the idea of net neutrality is so misunderstood.
Since 2005 the definition for net neutrality has been deconstructed countless times. Each time in an effort to ensure that the big ISP company stays big and profitable while the consumer remains in the dark.
Net Neutrality is this : The absence of restrictions or priorities placed on the type of content carried over the Internet by carriers and ISPs. All traffic is to be treated equally: packets are delivered on a first-come, first-serve basis regardless of destination or origination.
Net Neutrality is an idea that has existed since the inception of the Internet, a fair and free market place for the consumer and business owner alike. Major carriers have lobbied the FCC in order to charge large sites for their traffic. This seems reasonable for a large company to do until we realize what the future implications may be.
If net neutrality were completely abandoned, then at some point owners of all web sites could be required to pay carriers fees in order to prevent their content from bogging down in a low priority queue.
This sounds exactly like the answer Ed Whitacre, former CEO of AT&T, had in mind.
Related posts:
- McCain Blocking Net Neutrality
- The Nations Top ISP’s Against Net Neutrality…
- Net Neutrality Causing a Debate Over Wireless
Comments
Leave a Reply
