Net Neutrality: Pros and Cons

One of the greatest if not the greatest discussion that is pending legislative action is the issue of network neutrality.  The concept of net neutrality sets forth the basic idea that everyone is entitled to free usage of the Internet, assuming of course that each individual is paying for internet connection.  Also, when interpreting the term, one must also take into account that his or her usage is not interrupted by outside forces, such as the Internet Service Providers themselves, who are simply the suppliers of the Internet.  The conflict arises in the ISP argument that they should be able to regulate certain usage to the extent that they will be able to make the Internet more efficient, while those who advocate the system as it currently exists, free from restriction, see no need for change and do not want to pay for what they already receive for free.

Those in favor of net neutrality present the argument that the Internet as it now exists sufficiently supplies the public with the information at a reasonable cost, basically one that requires a person to own a computer and internet service, two aspects that are not uncommon for many an individual in this day and age.  The fight to preserve the system as it currently exists is being put forth by advocates through web in sites such as savetheinternet.com, which provides “fact vs. fiction” statements about the issue, a couple of them being that protection for net neutrality has always been around and that consumers would have to be the ones compensating the costs for the network regardless of whether or not it remained neutral.

The counter opinion, which is held mostly by ISP’s such as Time Warner Cable, Verizon, and AT&T, dictates that the companies should have control over the flow of information or bites through the system since they have the capability to run the system more effectively and can prevent less stalls in accessing web pages or using certain applications such as BitTorrent which requires much bandwidth but does not need to function in regular time since it’s a downloading function.  With online gaming, a tiny set back or stall of a partial second could have a significant effect on the outcome and quality of that game, such as with Halo. ISP companies state that they could also potentially regulate this, through the usage of tiered pricing, which is already used for different levels of internet connection, where pricing depends on the speed at which a consumer wants to receive connection, and the price they are willing to pay for that connection.  ISP control could potentially allow for two costs for the consumer: one for access to the Internet, and one to access specific content on the Internet channeled through the companies that would have to pay the service providers to keep their site afloat.

Below, President Barack Obama briefly addresses the issue back in 2007 during an MTV video interview, before he was elected President from Youtube.

TV, Internet, Phone- The powerful triumvirate?

Does the power of three pose a monopoly threat, or rather  greater quality and ease in paying the bills to one company?  Verizon, Time Warner, and Optimum, are three companies that provide cable for television, Internet and phone service.  They, like other companies, draw in the consumer by offering great deals and savings, however this is usually only for the first year. Purchasing the deal may be contingent on the person signing up for more than a year, during which a company could potentially jack up the rates.

With any of these Internet Protocol service providers, data is transmitted through a cable and passed onto all three mediums through Internet Protocol, or certain groupings of bits.  Thus, it can be easier for the consumer who chooses all three because the reception is simple and there is essentially unlimited bandwidth for the companies (thus far), so their is no need to worry about an overload.  IPTV, which is Internet Protocol that is specifically passed through television by IP providers, remains on a private network.

Verizon has currently set its rate at $74.99 per month for a year for all three services.  However, to find out about later rates, Verizon requires that the buyer put in personal information before they can obtain more detailed pricing information.  For Time Warner, their rates are a bit higher but they offer more perks up front such as HD DVR for three months and unlimted calling in the U.S., Canada, and Puerto Rico.  If one wanted to purchase all three services, he or she would have to sign up for each for a year to keep the fixed rate of $49.95 a month for cable, $34.95 a month for Road Runner Internet, and $39.95 per month for phone service, a total of $124.85 a month for all three, about $1,500 a year.  While this plan may seem enticing, it requires like Verizon that the consumer give personal information before they can obtain long term rates.  As for Optimum’s Triple Play plan, they provide great detail up front about the services they offer.  For example, they allow the consumer to compare their upload and download rates with other “typical” carriers, granted, Optimum is providing this information.  However, when it comes to rates, it also mandates that the buyer to purchase all three for $29.95 per month for a year.

Verizon pic from Google                Optimum pic from Google                   Time Warner pic from Google

While it is easier to pay one bill monthly and receive awesome perks for signing up for a three-for-all, in the long run, sticking with one company for all three might lead to too much power and dependency on that one company by the consumer.  On the other hand, for the company, offering television, Internet, and phone for the buyer could yield greater brand loyalty for the consumer/s, especially if they are parents because they could potentially pass that brand loyalty down to their children, who media companies have the hardest time targeting and strive the most towards pleasing.