NAME: CAL, ROBEE MARIE B.

CAL
COURSE & YEAR: BSIT-3

DATE: OCTOBER 8, 2015

TIME: 3:00-4:30PM, TTH

A REACTION PAPER ON INTERNET NEUTRALITY BY M. TURILLI, ET. AL.

As technology arises, Internet has become a part of our daily lives. It has already become
our best friend that it seems we wont be able to live or get through the day without it. We often
use the internet in almost everything: to communicate to other people, to pay bills, to save files,
to share pictures, music, videos, or links, to download applications, or to gather information
about a certain topic for our research.
In fact, it has been regarded as the collective tool for information management. But have
we given thought about the internet not being totally open and free? When we wouldnt be able
to view or download certain applications or files because our internet provider has put limits on
our browsing and a certain cap for downloading? This is what the principle of Internet Neutrality
is fighting up for. Some good examples of how Internet Neutrality has been violated is when our
internet service providers are placing a certain limit on our internet consumption, how they
would slow down the internet traffic in order for others to connect because it comes in a firstcome first-serve basis, and how they would prioritize the request of end-users.
By neutrality, we mean equal. We should be free to access all content we want to access
and download any application equally, regardless of the source. Internet service providers should
not be giving any special treatment to some specific online services or websites. We should
preserve our right to communicate freely. What we do, particularly what we view or download
online, shouldnt be a concern to anyone at all. Internet Neutrality may guarantee a levelled

playing field which symbolizes equality, it doesnt guarantee fairness. An example would be how

using a videoconferencing application like skype is a disadvantage because it will not be given a
high priority compare to plain browsing on google or other websites when in fact giving priority
to videoconferencing or streaming would not affect or impair browsing at all. Internet Neutrality
has still lots of things to consider before this can be fully implemented.
Some ethical issues surrounding the concept of neutrality in the internet and the relation
between neutrality and fairness are being discussed. Egalitarian and democratic principles are
practiced when it comes to the dynamics of information flow because its sensible enough. While
some undesirable repercussions are not ruled out in Internet Neutrality, an alternative approach
has been proposed in the form of Information Diversity. To dwell more on this, diversity means a
range of different things. Simply put, every type of information has the right to exist and prosper
in an environment populated by information. The diversity of the information available should
also be preserved. It has been said in Information Ethics that the more informationally rich an
environment, the more well-heeled the information are, the less the information insufficiency
there is. This would in turn fill up the purpose of Internet Neutrality without having its
consequences or drawbacks. Unfair prioritization or regulation would be avoided, and intelligent
routing and quality of service would be achieved.