It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Net Neutrality 2012

page: 1

log in


posted on Aug, 20 2012 @ 05:01 PM
ATS is a board where "alternative" ideas are openly discussed, and given the impact the removal of net neutrality could therefore have on it, I think it warrants a discussion...and quick look at where Obama/Romney stand on that IMPORTANT issue.

For those who don't know, here's what "net neutrality" means:

In short, net neutrality guarantees that YOU the user has free access to a wide variety of information. If net neutrality gets removed, companies like Verizon & Co. have the right to infringe on that right. So for example, if Verizon (or anyone paying them) doesn't want people to have access to ATS, they remove access or seriously cut bandwidth to the point where browsing becomes a major pain.

Now, no matter whether you're left or right you should HATE this because your online information sources will be auctioned to the highest bidder. Obama doesn't want people to read right-wing news? No problem, a few million $$$ to Verizon will ensure those people can't read that anymore. If Romney wins he can pull off the same crap and make it harder to access left-leaning news.

Essentially, it will turn our "free" Internet into something like they have in China...but instead of the government, it will be "owned" by whoever has the most money. We already have money governing politics, do we really want the same to happen to the Internet??

Since the Net Neutrality stuff in 2006 they have tried to push through that crap with a bunch of other bills, like SOPA:

And it won't be the last time they try!! It's happening in other countries too, like the UK!

They want control of the Internet, which now that the TV media (all of them!) are completely bought, is pretty much the last bastion of free speech and unbiased information (if you ignore the cat videos and obvious opinion blogs).

So the question is, where do Obama and Romney stand on this issue?

Barack Obama has been a proponent of net neutrality. Under his watch, the FCC has implemented net neutrality rules. These restrictions did not apply to wireless networks, though; a gaping loophole that will be problematic in the future, as mobile internet is exploding in popularity. Until it is addressed, Obama can only be given a barely passing grade with regard to net neutrality.

The fact that wireless wasn't included is as slashdot correctly states, Obama's performance in that respect wasn't stellar.

Republican Presidential candidate Mitt Romney has come down on the other side of the issue. The former Massachusetts governor strongly opposes net neutrality. According to Politico, Romney believes net neutrality will restrict ISPs, and that they alone should govern their networks. The governor has stated that he wants as little regulation of the internet as possible.

"As little regulation as possible" is code speak for "assigning total control to the highest bidder". The hilarious part is, right now it isn't regulated...everything gets the same access and people can fairly access information (left leaning, right leaning, furry loving, whatever...). He's the one who wants to introduce new regulation...regulation by corporations (or whoever pays them the most).


You can love/hate either Obama or Romney...but in this case the FACTS are clear:

If in the future you want your *insert favorite politician or cause* to have a fair platform online, you can't vote for Romney. It doesn't even matter what your opinion on other stuff is, if net neutrality gets removed your opinion might never reach others over the Internet in the future...not if someone wins who was so outspoken about net neutrality as Romney.

This is about FREE SPEECH, and free speech shouldn't be auctioned off to the highest bidder!
edit on 20-8-2012 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)

posted on Aug, 21 2012 @ 12:47 PM
So while the entire ATS community relies on net neutrality, this thread gets zero answers? That's kinda sad (and not because I care about replies) because while people focus on irrelevant stuff that doesn't concern the vast majority of people (like gay marriage), important subjects like net neutrality and who controls the internet get completely ignored.

Not surprised though to be honest because the mass media have been ignoring the subject too...

new topics

log in