Most of you probably don't know what Net Neutrality is. Net Neutrality is what keeps the internet free to people to use. The FCC chairman, wants to make the internet a more profitable place, and charge your internet bill for every website you visit, and make you pay more than you should for certain websites.
This is an example of what could possibly happen of Net Neutrality was no more:
"There’s a $3.00 upcharge to read the Huffington Post?! When did they start charging?!” You might ask, indignantly, soon. Then you’ll look more carefully, and realize that it’s your cable/Internet provider that’s charging for this. Don’t worry, though! For $19.99/mo more, you get UNLIMITED access to all of your favorite content on the Web. For $29.99 more you can watch your new TV Apps from CBS, NBC, and ABC. HBO/Showtime? They’re extra on top of their own fees."
But, we can contact the FCC by email and tell them to not do this. We can contact state representatives, and tell them not to vote on new Net Neutrality laws.
Questions:
1. Do you think that the internet could be compromised, meaning that certain website you would have to pay for on your family's monthly bill?
2. Why do you think the FCC chairman would make a vote for Net Neutrality laws?
My opinion:
I really think that certain websites could have a price tag on them in order to access them, but the internet should be free to everyone, not to profit from. Personally, i think the FCC chairman is crazy for trying to come up with these new internet laws, making websites inaccessible unless you pay a certain price on your bill every month.
Replies
Good topic choice and well done!
1). With Net Neutrality being abolished, this means that ISP's could charge on top of your regular fee for certain websites much like cable does. They could also throttle internet speeds and so much more making your experience on certain websites a nightmare.
2). Economy, pure greed. There is really no reason the FCC would want to abolish Net Neutrality, especially considering if they do, it could well be a violation of the First Amendment. They want to restrict us, they want money.
Also for anyone else who wants to support this cause consider researching this topic and seeing how you can state your opinions to the FCC, it could keep our internet a free one.
No, that takes away the point of having the internet, we deserve to be free on the web, the FCC has no right to do this. You shouldn't have to PAY to just go to youtube.
Because they want to restrict us.
Absolutely, we should have access to the internet for free, and The FCC has no right to make this decision for us. And Youtube is basically its own business, with people paying for YoutubeRed, but it kinda is going downhill, with the ad revenue.
I really believe that the internet should be free. every website. there are some websites that you have to pay for like netflix but they provide a service fo i dont mind paying for that. because he wantes to make money. thats why he did the vote.
Yes, this would most definite occur and it would suck since quite a few people need the internet for work. I'd end up boycotting the thing until it's back to normal. Obviously to make more money so they can become rich, and screw over the lower class people.
You're right about the upper class screwing the lower class people like us. It could happen, and i agree with you on boycotting the internet until it was back to normal, although they would think our effort is futile.
Everyone needs the internet, and it is supposed to be free, so why would they get rid of net neutrality, thereby destroying the internet as we know it to be free of charge, but we have to pay the expense of having it, but it is accessible to all users. The internet is used for so many daily things, like shopping, and schoolwork. I don't think the president told the FCC chairman to make net neutrality laws, he did that by going under the radar. The media is covering the scandals to distract us from what is actually going on.
I think that the internet could charge people to visit certain websites to make a profit off of it. Like websites that are bad for people to be on to begin with. This could promote people to not visit those sites, especially if they have to pay for it. I think the FCC Chairmen is trying to find a way to make more money--just like everyone else is. It could be beneficial for him and his company, and maybe with the extra money they will make the internet more efficient.
I don't think you should have to pay for certain websites you use because the internet bill should be for every website. You can't control or stop what website's kids use. If they did make this law, I don't think very many people would buy it because your bill would increase a lot.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next