I don’t see this as a moral or ethical issue, so I’m not sure that Catholics should necessarily have a stance on the issue. As a matter of prudential judgment, I support net neutrality.
Should Catholics support net neutrality?
i don’t see it as a catholic issue
however, i think the issue isn’t as clear as the pro-nn people want it to be.
is the net neutral now when google demonetizes you tubers for content that doesn’t go with googles political agenda? which forces the small creator off the internet.
is the net neutral when a company like google or go daddy can ban someone from listing
is it neutral when a search engines prioritizes links because of perceived political affiliations?
to me it is a case of pick your censor
i would like congress to pass laws and not delegate the authority to the fcc or ftc which can change course every election cycle
Whether or not the rules regarding net neutrality are necessary has yet to be seen. It could very well be the case that telecoms won’t change their policy after the repeal. My concern is more about what’s possible. Most people live with one, maybe two choices for for reasonable internet. There is no competition to speak of. So if Comcast, or Charter, or ATT decide to start charging extra to allow Netflix or Facebook or Catholic Answers on their service, we’re all without other options.
Considering how integral the net is to everyday life I’d like to see it run like a utility. I couldn’t imagine being successful in the US in this day and age without it. I guess maybe in extreme outlier circumstances… But for the most part, no.
It also depends on how it might be implemented.
facebook is banning ads if your store sells gun even if you aren’t advertising guns.
tell me how the tech companies being able to censor is any different than an ISP?
if you are in the lancaster pa area and need something look these people up.
So because Facebook can ban an advertiser, Comcast should be able to ban Facebook? How is that beneficial?
it isn’t, but the net isn’t neutral now,
most people don’t know the role google played in getting the laws put in place years ago.
the original plan was a two-tier system until google lobbied obama
pick your overlords
congress needs to fix the issue. no one should be banned/slowed as long as their content is legal.
Tech companies, like Facebook, are optional services that you can use or not use as you choose. But most people have only one broadband ISP in their area. It is monopoly of an essential service. It would be like having a phone company that did not allow you to place calls to the NRA.
this is true but in the real world what options do you really have especially if you are advertising.
There are plenty. Print media. Youtube. Targeted e-mail.
you tube? another censor
print media? depends on age targetting
targeted email? most identify thief groups recommend not opening an email from an unknown source.
they don’t compare to the mass appeal of the big tech companies
I can’t say that I’m very happy with the FCC’s decision to do away with net neutrality. This article makes some good points. However, the decision to do away with net neutrality might cripple purveyors of hardcore pornography.
I wonder how many people are against it just because Trump is doing it and if they really bother to understand the issue at all.
Is there no way to have both better nuetrality and be able to shut down pornography sites?
I’m inclined to support it, but the fact that all of the internet’s biggest censors are for it too gives me pause.
What’s more important is that Google, Facebook, and Twitter be forced to observe neutrality. They’re the ones that impede the flow of information, not Comcast.
This topic was automatically closed 14 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.