Mapping the world's opinions

argument top image

Is net neutrality good or bad? Show more Show less

Net neutrality is the idea that internet providers must not treat websites differently. All websites, irrespective of their content, equipment, or location must be treated with the same priority and speed. For net neutrality’s proponents, it is essential for preserving the internet’s commitment to information sharing and the establishment of a level playing field for all participants, but what are the pros and cons of net neutrality?

Net neutrality is bad Show more Show less

Net neutrality regulation hinders innovation and development in our internet products, preventing the emergence of more effective practices and more practical business models.
< Previous (2 of 2 Positions)

Net neutrality reduces the quality of service by allowing low-quality sites to succeed

Net neutrality results in a lower-quality service for all users. Some domains and web-services have earned a higher reputation because of the quality of content they provide. It is only fair to ensure that such websites are more readily available to consumers who prefer them.
< Previous (6 of 6 Arguments)

Context

The Argument

When it comes to video streaming services, there are upwards of 200 such services available on the internet. But if someone was asked to name a few of them, most people would probably only be able to name common ones such as Netflix, Youtube, Amazon Prime, and HBO. This goes to show that there are some services and networks which are much more popular than others. They are generally the ones that offer services that are much better in terms of quality. It is only fair that internet providers such as Comcast or Verizon place them in "digital fast lanes". Net neutrality means that some websites and services will be-in a sense-promoted by internet providers. This is because their loading speeds are much faster if they are in partnerships with major companies. It is clearly evident that some websites are simply more preferred by people compared to other ones. So why not let those websites be promoted in a faster and more efficient basis. But when all websites have the same loading speed and more preferred websites are not given faster access, then it lowers the entire quality of service available via the internet. The needs and demands of consumers are not met and they are especially not met in a more timely fashion. This causes a rift between people's preferences and the services provided; hence, it lowers the quality of service throughout the internet.

Counter arguments

Net neutrality does not lower the quality of service. It is undeniable that some websites are more highly favored by consumers than others. However, there are always going to be evolving, up-and-coming websites that offer better services in comparison to well-established ones. For example, if there is another streaming service that is much more innovative than Netflix, then it deserves a chance to be made available at the same speed as Netflix. Net neutrality ensures that this is the case. Otherwise, not as many people will access it. This is not because they do not prefer the new website but because it is too inefficient for them. As people begin to realize that only the age-old products are readily available on the internet, there would be much discomfort and disappointment expressed by people. This is what will ultimately bring down the quality of service.

Framing

Premises

Rejecting the premises

Proponents

Further Reading

References

    Explore related arguments

    This page was last edited on Saturday, 27 Jun 2020 at 13:33 UTC