In recent events, net neutrality has been under attack by the modern telecommunications companies from our age. The attacks threaten the future of the internet which includes free speech, innovation, and social, economic balance of the affected country which is the United States of America.
Net neutrality is the basic principle that “the government who is in charge should oblige all of the internet service providers to always and equally treat all the data that is being sent around the web and to not discriminate against any type of user or company. This means that internet service providers cannot block or slow down in any way websites or any online content.” (Gilroy 1). The main issue that will be talked about in this essay is the fact the
…show more content…
Internet providers have never had any plans to block content or to try to degrade the performance of the network.” (Hart 750). Essentially, they think having the internet without any laws would be in general more beneficial. The parties who support the keeping of net neutrality and its laws include tech giants such as Netflix, Mozilla Foundation and Consumer Federation of America. Their arguments are that “they are concerned about the potential discriminatory service from providers. Telecommunications companies should be required to provide all the consumers equally regardless of their geographical location or income. If the FCC stops regulating, providers can decide to stop offering services to lower-income families or to poorer neighborhoods. Also, in the absence of regulation internet access providers will adopt a non-neutral …show more content…
These parties include Verizon and many other telecommunication companies, the government the content providers and finally the users of the internet. A utilitarian when faced with this dilemma would simply try to find a solution that would benefit the greatest good for people even if it would hurt the companies that are offering the internet services. In the case of net neutrality if it were to be kept the current regulations in place would greatly benefit the greatest amount of people. The reasons for this is that is with the current regulations anyone that has access to the internet can access and browser the internet equally and without any discrimination. In a utilitarian’s point of view the benefits of this far out grow the disadvantages that it brings to the internet service providers. A letter from the behalf tech giants of all around the world which is that companies state that by keeping net neutrality as it is now it would “decrease their utility because they believe it will slow down innovation and that it is a violation of free speech. Also, if the current regulation stays, it would mean that the current broadband providers would be unable to invest the billions of dollars in other sectors of the economy to drive them forward. If there was any reduction in this spending, this would choke the entire economy
When we think of those skilled in the art of rhetoric, we often jump to those we know are trying to convince us of something, like politicians, salesmen, lawyers, etc. We do not always consider corporate CEOs part of that group though Netflix CEO, Reed Hastings, would have us believing another thing. On March 20th, 2014, Hastings published an article titled “Internet Tolls And The Case For Strong Net Neutrality” on Netflix’s official blog. Just under a month before the blog was posted, Netflix settled a deal paying Comcast, America’s largest cable and Internet service provider (ISP), for faster and more reliable service to Comcast’s subscribers (Cohen and Wyatt). These “internet tolls” go against the culture of net neutrality in America, which in its essence is when no piece of information is prioritized over another on broadband networks. Hastings took to their blog to advocate for net neutrality and against abusive ISPs. Whether he was conscious of his rhetorical finesse or not, he wrote quite convincingly thus turning this blog into an excellent rhetorical artifact. Reed Hastings’ blog post aims to convince American Internet consumers that strong net neutrality is important by appealing to their values of choice, frugality and empathy while simultaneously making ISPs seem ill intentioned and Netflix seem honorable.
In spectacularly calloused fashion, the Trump administration recently announced the termination of the Obama-era Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA. With thousands of hard-earned collegiate degrees, blossoming careers and immeasurable amounts of gratitude and patriotism, DACA recipients have inspired the successes of future generations. Yet, with the stunning overconfidence of a seasoned gambler and the bumbling inexperience of an amateur, President Trump may have just jeopardized the futures of thousands of dreamers and America’s identity, gratifying his own electoral base through the destruction our nation’s identity.
The NSA is a U.S. intelligence agency responsible for providing the government with information on inner and foreign affairs, particularly for the prevention of terrorism and crime. The NSA maintains several database networks in which they receive private information on American citizens. The agency has access to phone calls, emails, photos, recordings, and backgrounds of practically all people residing in the United States. Started in 1952 by President Harry Truman, the NSA is tasked with the global monitoring and surveillance of targeted individuals in American territory. As part of the growing practice of mass surveillance in the United States, the agency collects and stores all phone records of all American citizens. People argue that this collected information is very intrusive, and the NSA may find something personal that someone may not have wanted anyone to know. While this intrusion's main purpose is to avoid events of terrorism, recent information leaks by Edward Snowden, a former NSA contractor, show that the agency may actually be infringing upon the rights of the American citizen. Whether people like it or not, it seems that the NSA will continue to spy on the people of the United States in an attempt to avert acts of terrorism. Although there are many pros and cons to this surveillance of American citizens, the agency is ultimately just doing its job to protect the lives of the people. Unless a person is actually planning on committing a major crime, there is no real reason for citizens to worry about the NSA and it's invasion of our privacy. The agency is not out to look for embarrassing information about its citizens, rather, only searches for and analyzes information which may lead to the identification of a targe...
We all have heard the quote “Life, Liberty, Land, and the Pursuit to Happiness” and that is the promise of a life here in America. As Americans we pride ourselves on these freedoms that allow us to live everyday. We are one of the only countries that have this promise and it is what draws people from all of over the world to come here. Our founding fathers of the United States of America wrote these words, having no idea the impact that they would have for the rest of this countries history. Those words were the foundation for government, and it wasn’t perfect at first but slowly it matured into what we have today, strong and powerful. To other nations America is seen as the World Power, and a somewhat perfect nation to live in. Unfortunately corruption, scandals and controversies have tainted our once golden glow, and other nations are weary of watching their steps. One of the most controversial elements to our government is the NSA. Hidden in the shadows from American and global knowledge is what the NSA is actually doing and watching out for. Only very recently has the NSA been ripped from the shadows and brought to light what exactly is going on inside those walls. They are “spying” on not only America’s personal data, but foreign leaders as well. The NSA says it’s for the safety for everyone against terrorism and attacks. However, it has gone way to far and violates a constitutional right, privacy. The NSA has overstepped their boundaries, and spying doesn’t seem to make a difference in safety.
On January 1st, 1994, a treaty that created the largest free trade area were signed into place by the trilateral of United States, Canada, and Mexico. NAFTA is a promise made by world’s most significant corporations claiming to create many high paying jobs and raise the standard of living in the US, Canada and Mexico. As we approach its 21st birthday, NAFTA now links 450 million people producing trillion dollars’ worth of goods and services each year. However, behind this seemingly good deal, it also created many underlying issues. Beginning with NAFTA giving corporation opportunities to move factories aboard to the lower-cost Mexico. Manufacturing aboard did not only outsourced American jobs, it also caused manufacturers that remained to lower
Free trade is a policy that lifts all trade tariffs and barriers and thus encouraging the free movement of goods (imports and exports) between nations. Agreements to free trade establish free markets where countries can engage in trade in a free and conducive environment. This type of trade is made possible by free trade agreements made between countries. According to the International Trade Administration, these agreements help minimize barriers to exports form the US, protect their interests as well as enhance the rule of law in member countries. NAFTA is one of such agreements.
Although the net neutrality debate didn’t come into the spot light so long ago, it has sparked controversy in the communications world. This concept provides a positive impact to the consumers, competition and network owners/internet service providers. It broadens the aspect of equality, which the open Internet was first based on. The profound effects on the aforementioned players provide a supported purpose to regulate the notion of net neutrality.
Net Neutrality requires to give everyone access to everything on the internet. This means that your internet provider won’t charge you for using specific websites. But with this, companies will have the ability to charge you for using basic things such as email, Spotify and even YouTube. Fast and slow lanes will also be included which may vary depending of what packages you paid for. But that is just the beginning, being that with this they will be able to control what you are able to see and not, ending Freedom of Speech in the
Under the US Patriot Act, or Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism, I believe citizens have only been put in danger. The Patriot Act was created to keep terrorism at bay and to launch The United States of America forward. However, it has done nothing but set us back. How can we live in a country where everyone is a suspected criminal? I believe that The Patriot Act does not help control terrorism. Instead, it undermines us as loyal citizens and is a way for the government to abuse their power over the citizens. How are we really free as Americans when our government is keeping a very watchful eye on us? Almost too watchful. The government has access to almost everything. As much as I love being an American I don’t think the US Government is perfect. What if the the government makes a mistake? What if they are really accusing the wrong people? It looks as though the government is resorting to old tactics that will be discussed further in this essay. The Patriot Act is a faulty document that puts the lives of Americans at risk. I also believe that the Patriot Act was put together way too quickly after the tragic event the stirred the nation and brought fear to many peoples hearts on September 11th, 2001. We all believed that our nation had fallen to the ground and there was no way of coming back. However, the government drew up The Patriot Act 45 days after the attacks. Congress seemed to have forgotten the constitutional rights that we were given by our founding fathers a long time ago. The Patriot Act goes against numerous constitutional rights that we have. This including our first, fourth, and sixth amendment rights. As one of the founding fathers, Benjamin...
The National Security Agency (NSA) is considered to be one of the largest components so the U.S intelligence community stands. It is primarily responsible for gathering intelligence report from detailed communications with the active involvement of the various intelligence tools. It was established in 1952 from the code breaking effort adopted by the handful of military officers and civilians and by and by and by the agency grew in stature and marked its position to gain the role of signal intelligence which is also known as SIGNIT. All of this has resulted from the initiatives taken by the congress and actually it is the congress that helped in providing it the required framework required NSA to carry out its various activities and the enacted laws skilfully guides the limits of NSA. From the perspective of electronic surveillance of US persons and also they are supporting and taking due notice of the public pertaining to the issues at NSA and the related reforms that are directed to make NSA more and more equipped in meeting up with the quotidian technical as well as geopolitical challenges. At present, NSA is constantly coming across multitude of challenges and as well as seeing through a difficult operational environment that brings in certain limitations to its work areas like spending levels for intelligence reports into queries for the future prospects of NSA. The European Parliament has also came forward highlighting the interest of the public who allege that the US along with few other countries are constantly involved in systematic electronic eavesdropping so as to be able to launce the commercial interest of US operations in full effect. (Linda B. 1999)
Tim Wu is known as “the father of Net Neutrality” for first coining the term “Net Neutrality”. He is a professor at Columbia Law School and the director of the Poliak Center at Columbia Journalism School. He commonly talks about other topics such as copyright, private power and free speech. Wu believes that net neutrality can prevent companies and carriers to offer “special” treatment to one specific provider instead of another. According to Wu, Net Neutrality benefits anyone in some way and believes that Internet transparency is critical because carriers fail to tell what services they provide for the user. At the core of Net neutrality, there is a free speech principle. It allows speakers and innovators to reach people that they would not
Is the NSA Spying Justified? Benjamin Franklin once said, “They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” By saying this, he means that the violation of rights for national security is not justified. Because I agree with Benjamin Franklin in this statement, I am strongly against the mass collection of data by the NSA. Because the NSA surveillance of us does nothing but hurt us, the collection of data is where the line between national security versus personal liberty must be.
The idea of net neutrality is not something that has come out of nowhere. Throughout the history of the United States, it has been the job of the federal government to break trusts (large corporations/monopolies or near monopolies) or prevent them from forming. This became an important part of the government because it was done to protect consumers from the companies and promote competition between companies. Currently the market of telecommunications is controlled by large corporations with hundreds of small daughter corporations that they control. According to a report done by the FCC on competition in the telecommunications market, 98.8% of the wireless market is controlled by only four companies, Verizon, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint (Federal
Net neutrality was the big talk towards the end of 2017. Taking away net neutrality would cause chaos in my opinion. Making schools and other organizations pay to use technology only discourages them from doing so which is a major step backwards in such a technological point in time. The world is constantly creating new ways to implement technology to our everyday lives and charging us to do so is not a step in the right direction. Saying that getting rid of net neutrality will do away with discrimination is absurd. Discrimination was around way before the internet was but instead we once again have one political party trying to undermine the other by playing the victim. I do agree that it isn’t right that such huge corporations such as
Net neutrality is an issue that has been brought up several times throughout the years but is currently resurfacing as Ajit Pai, chairman of the FCC, plans to have it repealed. Voting for this decision will take place on the 14th. Before delving too deeply into the topic, let's define net neutrality. It’s the principle that companies that connect consumers to the internet cannot block any content. They must make all content available at the same speed, meaning they can't slow the loading speed of one site over another, treating everything equally. If net neutrality is voted to be repealed, this will cause major issues for consumers in the months to come.