On Dec. 14 Congress will vote to repeal net neutrality, the principle that protects equal internet service.

Rachel Frainey

It is unethical for the internet to be sold like cable packages. Repealing net neutrality restricts lower income citizens from free access to information. Access to information is, and should continue to be, free.

China plans to enact a Social Credit System in 2020 to judge their citizens based on what they look at on the internet by monitoring their online activity, according to an Oct. 2015 article on BBC.com. Anything from who the person interacts with to what bills they pay can be monitored by the government. If net neutrality is repealed, the U.S. may have a similar fate. Dismantling net neutrality would completely eliminate privacy.

Currently, we have the freedom to easily Google a question we don’t know the answer to, share thoughts and opinions on social media sites and even create our own websites. Processing the thought of equal internet being taken away from citizens who don’t have to money to pay for it is hard.

Instead of just watching this happen, people have the choice to actively try to stop the repeal of net neutrality.

Text RESIST to 50409 or go to battleforthenet.com to send a letter to Congress to stop the repeal of net neutrality. Congress has the power to stop the Federal Communications Commission vote, so the voices of many need to be heard to incite change and save the internet.

The future of the internet if net neutrality is repealed would, overall, be completely unfair. Services on the internet would be restricted to those who can afford it which would strongly affect the way people gather information and learn about all sorts of subjects – the news, homework help for students, keeping in touch with friends and family. If net neutrality were repealed it would be a step towards an totalitarian future for the U.S.

Maddi Smith

The conversation surrounding net neutrality has exploded on social media, following the Federal Communications Commission’s plan to repeal net neutrality, which would allow internet service providers to charge websites for faster internet speeds, according to a Nov. 28 New York Times article.

If this plan successfully repeals net neutrality, it would create an internet system where website owners pay Internet Service Providers, ISPs, for their content to load faster, otherwise called “paid prioritization,” according to a Nov. 27 ARS Technica article. Net neutrality can’t be revoked or it will lead to companies charging higher prices for something they don’t own.

If the Federal Communications Commission repeals Net Neutrality and allows for ISPs to create paid “fast lanes” for certain websites, it will create a divide between ISPs, websites, and users. Creating “paid prioritization” causes an unfair advantage by putting the power of the internet in the hands of ISPs.

Ultimately, this revocation will lead to internet users paying higher prices for ISPs who have “fast lanes.” Also, website providers will pay more for faster content delivery to their users.

The ARS Technica article cites Comcast as a service provider that is eager to see Net Neutrality revoked. Comcast would then be able to charge website providers higher prices for faster delivery speeds. Users would then feel obligated to pay for Comcast, whose prices might rise in light of their new “fast lanes.”

Net neutrality can’t be revoked or it will lead to companies charging higher prices for something they don’t own. ISPs give access to internet networks and users, but they don’t actually own the internet. They already charge a profit for allowing users access at different speeds, so they should not be able to charge website providers as well.

Lucas Skye

Without net neutrality, ISP’s can essentially become gatekeepers, choosing what content people have access to on the internet and how fast. This is unacceptable. Restricting the democratic internet is unethical as it makes information and content on the internet inaccessible to those who cannot afford to pay extra charges for content that should be free.

When one subscribes to an internet service, typically their internet is always at its highest possible speed, but without net neutrality ISP’s can choose what websites they like and make the internet connections the customers have to them faster and websites they dislike go much slower. Restricting access to websites and making formerly free websites only accessible by purchasing extra packages is clearly fiscal censorship, an egregious violation of first amendment rights.

An internet without neutrality puts ISP’s in a place where there’s great incentive to unfairly slow down their competitors internet speed and monopolize the web, thus stifling competition. Major proponents for this change have lied about this being a problem. “We don’t see evidence of that happening in the marketplace,” said Ajit Pai, current FCC chairman and former Verizon lawyer, in an April 27 PBS News Hour Interview. This is a blatant lie, ISP’s have used their power to give themselves an unfair advantage over their competition in the past.

Comcast has been found culpable of intentionally slowing down their customers’ download speeds in Oct. 2013 when accessing Netflix by a staggering 27 percent, according to information released Jan. 14 by Netflix.

It was only after Netflix gave into Comcast’s demands by paying extra that customers’ internet speeds increased when connecting to Netflix’s service. Messing with Netflix is not chill.

Ending Net Neutrality undermines the entire premise of the internet. The internet isn’t just a product, it’s a means of communication and being able to control what information Americans have access to on the internet is against the principles of liberty this nation prides so dearly.