The Internet is one of the greatest things humanity has ever created. It allows everyone to access any information they want without any hesitation. His ability to teach, connect and provide for people is unprecedented. This is all thanks to something called net neutrality. Net neutrality is the idea that Internet service providers, or ISPs, should provide equal access to all information available on the Internet. This means that ISPs like Verizon, Comcast, or AT&T cannot regulate, block, or slow down what you want to view. Regardless of popularity or broadband usage, all sites are treated the same. In addition to treating all sites fairly, customers are not charged extra for accessing certain websites or types of data. In the United States, the Internet is regulated by the Federal Communications Commission, or FCC. While there is no official bill related to net neutrality, the FCC created six net neutrality principles in 2010. These principles essentially prevent ISPs from blocking or slowing down certain websites and allow all sites to have equal consumer accessibility. Since 2010, these rules have been followed by ISPs, but they are starting to lose ground since President Trump took office. As president, Trump chose Ajit Pai, a staunch supporter of net neutrality as chairman of the FCC who, as president, began attempting to dismantle net neutrality rules. While the vast majority of Americans support net neutrality, it is still a highly controversial topic involving government involvement with businesses. Net neutrality allows the internet to be the only place where everyone is truly equal, but finding the balance of power between consumer and provider is what makes it so highly contested. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay As mentioned above, net neutrality is the principle that all information on the Internet should be treated equally. Customers pay their ISPs for Internet access. They don't pay them to act as an information blocker that lets them see only what they want. Dismantling net neutrality would allow companies like Comcast, Verizon, and AT&T, which are basically monopolies, to grant select priority access to certain consumers or websites. Without a doubt, those who would pay more would most likely get better access. If net neutrality goes away, some ISPs may charge certain content providers more. Essentially, whoever has the most money gets the best access. ISPs would be able to slow down any site they want or even block it. Under the old FCC rules, this would not be possible. All information on the Internet would be provided equally to any consumer who accesses it. Now that those rules have been abolished, an ISP would be able to limit what the consumer sees as long as they disclose it. While they must disclose information about which sites they are throttling, this may only be a small asterisk in their terms and conditions and may be overlooked by the vast majority of users. Net neutrality only governs the availability of information that an ISP guarantees to its consumers, it does not control Internet speeds for customers who pay more. Like all things, net neutrality has its pros and cons. People have the right to the Internetwithout the ISP acting like a parent, monitoring and blocking what you can and cannot see. Some opponents of net neutrality argue that it could have several negative effects on communications in the United States. While net neutrality may seem great on the surface, it has some downsides. According to ISPs, sites that use a lot of data like Netflix and YouTube (mostly streaming videos), slow down the speed of all information reached. Since everyone is charged the same amount regardless of the bandwidth they are using, a large company like Netflix that uses more than 30% of the nation's bandwidth does not have to pay more. This forces consumers to pay for major infrastructure upgrades so companies like Netflix can continue streaming. Instead of paying the company that uses all the space, people have to pay. Regardless of whether they use Netflix or not, all customers must pay for streaming. Because they use more bandwidth, less information can be carried across the cable they built. ISPs say that if they charged these sites more, they would have enough money to be able to build a new system that would allow this information to be transmitted quickly. This can be considered unfair. Using less, but paying the same as another company that uses 10x the data may not be right at all. While net neutrality has some disadvantages, there are also many positives. The Internet was designed to make everyone equal. Everyone's voices are heard and everyone can see what they want to see. It follows the same format as the telecommunications system. Everyone is able to communicate with everyone else, regardless of their provider. People in favor of net neutrality argue that it helps small businesses get a foot in the door when it comes to the consumer. For example, if you were looking for flowers for sale, not only would you get information from a large company, but you would also get information from a local florist. If businesses were to block the local florist's information because a company like 1800flowers.com can afford to pay ISPs more, the local florist could lose business. In addition to small businesses receiving a level playing field with multi-billion dollar companies, these multi-billion dollar companies are also in favor of net neutrality. A company like Netflix, which streams movies and uses maximum bandwidth, cannot be charged more by an ISP for using more space. In general, everyone is a supporter of net neutrality, except ISPs. ISPs seem to be the only ones against net neutrality. Being one of Comcast's main competitors, Netflix has faced limitations from them. Before 2015, Comcast slowed down Netflix's speeds unless it paid more to stream its data faster. To speed up one transmitter, you have to slow down another. Small businesses wouldn't be able to keep up with large corporations who can afford to pay for faster speeds. Furthermore, increasing prices does not guarantee faster transmission. ISPs argue that this new revenue would improve their Internet infrastructure. This may not be the case. There's nothing stopping ISPs from taking all that money and distributing it among its shareholders. After all, they are monopolies. They can do almost anything they want. With the dissolution of net neutrality, the Internet could become like cable television. Providers can let their customers choose package or plans.