Thank God for Nancy Pelosi?

Nancy Pelosi, Speaker of the House, recently made commented on FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski's announcement concerning a free and open internet. Genachowski's stance on the issue of Net Neutrality favors the FCC's limitation of Internet Service Providers. He believes that the power of controlling who sees what on the internet should not be in the hands of the service providers, but in the FCC's. Pelosi wants to preserve the openness and freedom of what is the internet; she defines her position of the Net Neutrality bill to the House as in accordance with Genachowski's.

The bill would prevent internet service providers from acting as "traffic cops" on the net. The purpose of the bill was not to control and regulate the internet, but rather lay down rules to keep online engagement fair and equal for all users.

Sadly, on September 27, the bill was rejected by congressional leaders. The 269-152 vote fell largely along party lines. Ultimately, it was the Republican party which provided the majority of the distaste for the bill.

This video explains that informational media has taken a turn from social to privatized. Newsprint, radio, and even television were somewhat interactive in their beginnings. A printing press was moderately priced for their day (~$40,000 in our time), people could broadcast anything via the radio, and television used to be free to anyone with an antennae. All of these personal freedoms and opportunities for free speech have been stripped away from us by our governing bodies. Now we have the internet; a melting pot of ideas and opportunities, and we are being threatened with the removal of this as well? Why does anybody have to control the internet? Why do we have to turn such an awesome tool into a capitalistic money-generating source of revenue for ISP's?

The internet has become such an integral part of our lives to change is or charge for it may disrupt the good thing we have going.

The Internet is a Democracy, NOT an oligarchy

A democratic government is defined my Wikipedia as a form government in which state-power is held by the majority of citizens within a country or a state. As an American, we are supposedly living in a democratic structure of government, and the internet being a facet of our society, should theoretically be democratic as well. As is stands now, the internet isn't really comparable to any form of government, except for maybe anarchy. Users are allowed to access anything, change and personalize websites, connect to one another, etc.; the internet is pretty much free game. But situations which have risen recently could be the demise of free-range internet.

Internet Service Providers such as AT&T, Comcast, etc, are threatening to charge users tiered serves packages where certain users would have to pay more in order to get full access, and users who would choose not to pay the added fees would either get limited or no access. This could ultimately cause discriminatory practices, possibly a decline of speech and expression on the web, and would put the power in the hands of the conglomerates who would be cashing in. A filtered internet is like stifling a child's creativity. It has already been one of the most useful and innovative tools in the past 15 years. If public access were to be diminished by the ISP's, the internet as we know it today would take a turn for the worse.

FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski recently made the announcement that he will do whatever it takes to preserve free and open internet. He states:

"The rise of serious challenges to the traditional operation of the Internet puts us at a crossroads. We could see technology used to shut doors to entrepreneurs instead of opening them. The spirit of innovation stifled. A full and free flow of information compromised.

Or we could take steps to preserve a free and open Internet, helping to ensure a future of opportunity, prosperity, and the vibrant flow of information and ideas.

I believe we must choose to safeguard the openness that has made the Internet a stunning success. That is why today, I delivered a speech announcing that the FCC will be the smart cop on the beat when it comes to preserving a free and open Internet.

In particular, I proposed that the FCC adopt two new rules to help achieve this."

With these rules, Genachowski hopes to not allow broadband providers to discriminate against any content on the internet and encourage broadband providers to be transparent about their practices. On the FCC's website about a free and open internet, Genachowski states that although this goal seems easy, the steps taken to reach the goal are not so clear.

I completely side with Genachowski and the FCC. Internet Service Providers should have no say in who gets to view which website. If I had a choice, I believe the internet should stay a free anarchy, or maybe somewhere closer to democracy (with an unbiased body governing). It should by no means be controlled by the very people that are profiting. This is where corruption comes into play. The internet is by the people for the people, not an oligarchy to be controlled by a few ISP's.