How new FCC rules may jeopardize the Web as we know it By Danielle Damper

There is no denying that we live in the age of the Internet. Now, more than ever, it’s the medium that we communicate through, how we work, and even how we experience the world. The Net is vital not only to our economy, but to our daily lives. The Net is something we should work to protect. However, our free internet is currently being threatened, with potentially disastrous results.

“Net neutrality” is the idea that all data on the internet should be treated equally, and that the user, not the provider, should be able to decide what to consume.

However, the FCC is in the process of amending its regulations to allow for internet service providers to allow faster access to content providers who are willing to pay. In other words, services and pages provided by large companies willing to pay extra will reach our computer screens faster and easier than the pages whose companies do not choose to pay.

This may not seem like a big deal; however, this gives large companies a tremendous edge in reaching potential consumers at the expense of small businesses. Sites like small startups simply cannot compete with the huge pocketbooks of giants like Amazon, and, because of this, will be forced into the background. Although FCC chair (and ex-wireless industry lobbyist) Tom Wheeler claims that these policies actually benefit a free market, this could potentially harm millions of small businesses.

Even more upsetting are the implications this could have for news and the media. We already live in a world of big media, and with these new regulations, it will only get worse. Six media conglomerates already own over 90% of our media, controlling most of what we see, hear, and read. By allowing these six companies to pay for preferential treatment on the Net, we run the risk of having big money control everything we are exposed to.

If we are only seeing the news that certain companies want us to see, how can we have the information needed to make smart decisions? Imagine a world where the only news available is via FOX News. Tell me that this is not bad for democracy. The Net should not be a reinforcement tool for the status quo but a way for every opinion, no matter how unconventional, to be heard.

At its best, the Internet is a stream of free-flowing information where people can organize movements and get their message out to millions, without many repercussions. It is a powerful tool; let’s not forget that the Arab Spring of 2011 may never have happened if protesters didn't have the Web to spread their message. If the Net is powerful enough to topple regimes, why are we handing it over to the highest bidder?

The issue of Net neutrality is an issue which defines what it means to be a citizen in the age of the Internet. And in this, we need to exercise our rights as citizens to be heard. We cannot allow for our Internet to be purchased by big money without a fight.