Contact theSOPAbout theSOPSupport theSOPWritersEditorsManaging Editors
theSOP logo
Published:July 18th, 2008 08:31 EST

Media Is The Masses: Net Neutralization

By Sean Stubblefield

How entrenched and dependant we`ve become on our communications technology, particularly the internets. Seems like we can`t do anything these days without internet. How did we ever get anything done before the internets?


Student Operated Press contributor Del Marbrook commented to me, that considering how important and prevalent the internets have become in our common way of life and business, the profoundly astounding lack of discussion on the subject by the Presidential candidates. And once again, he makes an excellent point. Why is this vital issue not part of their campaign platform? Why are none of the candidates addressing this topic that has significant and substantial social, cultural and economic relevance? A threat to net neutrality should be at the top of their list of issues to comment on. The internets function-- and are what it is-- because it is laissez fair and all "creative commons" and "open source". If it wasn`t free for users to navigate, it would collapse. Especially considering the prevalent "get everything for nothing" attitude-- which the internet engenders.


Telecommunications companies and Big Business are talking and making plans about commodifying our internet mobility and accessibility. Don`t you think that something which so drastically effects and concerns a huge portion of the nation deserves a mention from a person who aims to be President and "Leader of the free world"?


Rumor has it that internet providers could initiate a system that would effectively destroy the internet as a social medium and business model, reducing it to nothing more than a tool of commercialization and marketing for big brand names consorting with them.

Not to mention government propaganda.


How? By instating the method used by cable companies: selling programming packages with access to particular websites and content. If you want to access more sites than what`s in the basic package, then you have to pay more.


The mainstay of the internets "the smaller personal and public sites-- would be driven into non-existence. Losing visitors en masse and being unable to afford operating the site, most sites will shut down or diminish. It will no longer be practical or desirable for people to create and maintain websites. Why put in the time and effort if no one will or can visit your site?


This is typical thinking indicative of the Big Business mentality: we`ll bilk you for all you`re worth, even if it puts us out of business. As long as they might "profit" in the process, they don`t care. They are only concerned with immediate short term results and lining their own pockets, regardless of the consequences or best interests of the community.


How askew is their view for something as ludicrous as this to make sense to them and seem like a great idea? Seriously. Where`s the logic?


It would be the equivalent of a State channel that enters the realm of the Orwellian, and Corporate American in nature. Indeed, it is fair to say that United States has been co-opted by The America Corporation.