What is your stance on net neutrality?

Net neutrality was a concept completely foreign to me until a couple weeks ago. You might be asking yourself, “What is net neutrality?” According to Common Cause, it “is the principle that Internet users should be able to access any web content they choose and use any applications they choose, without restrictions or limitations imposed by their Internet service provider.”



We, as users, are able to create profiles on Facebook and MySpace, create personal web pages and post blogs. With the openness of the Internet, we are able to access these pages. With new legislations against net neutrality—thanks to AT&T and Verizon—you probably would not be able to access these personal pages. In fact, these Internet Service Providers (ISP’s) could pick and choose what content comes up in your searches and at what speed you can access websites. Sound fair? Not really. “Net neutrality and the billion dollar question” says that “the phone companies are also eager to provide tiered services in which websites that paid them money would be more easily accessible to their Internet customers than ones which did not.” This would be a disaster for those who have created a name for themselves on the World Wide Web, such as bloggers and YouTube users.

From what research I have done on the topic, I think net neutrality is necessary in keeping the Internet alive. It doesn’t seem that ISP’s are out to eliminate illegal content, they are just out to simply filter what you see and get you to use their applications and favored pages. Some of those who hold an anti-net neutrality stance are definitely those who can afford to choke up a chunk of change in hopes that their site will continue to appear as the #1 result in searches.

I believe that virtual worlds, blogs and the ability to upload and share pictures and videos are a huge part of what makes the internet so unique. If corporate big-wigs continue in their quest to change net neutrality, the internet will lose much of why people love it so much.

For net neutrality?

The Death of The Internet?
Fighting for Net Neutrality and Internet Freedom
Stop Big Media
Open Internet Coalition

Bored? Get gossip on Wikileaks!

We’ve all heard about confidential information being leaked to the public. Most of the time, people just contacted journalists, now you can anonymously submit information on WikiLeaks . Whether it is the submission of a document or a story, they will gladly take your gossip piece!

While WikiLeaks focuses its attention on stories from the former Soviet Union, Africa, the Middle East and Asia, they will take information from anywhere. The founders of WikiLieaks “believe that transparency in government activities leads to reduced corruption, better government and stronger democracies. All governments can benefit from increased scrutiny by the world community, as well as their own people.”

WikiLeaks is a prime example of bad PR. This is every government and company’s worst nightmare. While I do think the internet is a breeding ground of false information, I do believe that the people deserve to be educated and informed.

For example, in February, the Julius Baer bank in Switzerland, sued WikiLeaks for posting many of the banks private documents containing confidential information online. According to a former employee, these documents showed that the bank was engaging in illegal practices. US Judge White of California ruled that the domain be removed and locked so it could not be restarted on another server. Weeks later, WikiLeaks was able to re-open the site.

The first ruling of Judge White brings a few questions to mind. Was the ruling a violation of the First Amendment? Yes. But do websites take advantage of the freedoms provided by the First Amendment? I THINK SO.

Any thoughts?

In the meantime... check out these links.

Wikileaks Case PR Disaster for Swiss Bank
Wikileaks Censored By Lawsuit
Judge Allows Wikileaks Site to Re-open
Gossip Sites Push Web 'Anonymity' to Fore