What I like the most about Vauhini Vara, is simply how clear and direct she is with her style of informing and staying non-bias on the issue. I feel that this enables readers to come up with their own stances or opinions on the situation.
This article elaborates the reasons for the most recent congressional debate on “Net Neutrality.” The on-going debate is based off right-wing representatives/lobbyists reforming the regulations and restrictions of the privatization of the web. Times are changing and almost everyone can access the internet. “Although the Internet may once have been a luxury, these days it’s a form of infrastructure, not dissimilar to water pipes or roads—and that towns lacking reliable access to it risk falling behind,” Vara states. The fight over Net Neutrality is whether Internet providers should be able to charge Web companies to get their content delivered to customers at faster speeds than usual, or whether all content should be treated equally. Those who appose Net Neutrality are those who would benefit financially the most out of this reform. For example, A.T. & T., Verizon, Comcast, and others opposed strong net-neutrality rules. “Some of the only groups in favor of strong rules were little-known activist organizations like Fight for the Future, Demand Progress, and Free Press; a few startups like Tumblr and Kickstarter and the narrow segment of the public that actually pays attention to such things immediate action to accelerate deployment of such capability by removing barriers to infrastructure investment and by promoting competition in the telecommunications market,” Vara explains. This youthful generation is changing from a “lets go play kickball,” to “lets play on our phones and tablets.” The Internet is a huge factor in our everyday lives and this issue of debate can effect all of us and the way we use the web in the next 20 years.
per cent. Stated simply, a strong net-neutrality rule locks in the status quo for the most profitable part of the cable industry’s business.