Consumer awareness and understanding of the concept of “net neutrality” is low. However, once the implications are made fully apparent, public reaction is very strong. It is therefore crucial that businesses and governments engage the public in a more open discussion.

Generally accepted to be one of the World Wide Web’s fundamental guiding principles, it appears that “Net Neutrality” may be under increasing threat from political, corporate and market forces. While debate continues as to its exact definition, “Net Neutrality” can be simply expressed as the view that “all internet traffic should be treated equally”; a principle that has resulted in freely available news and information, open digital platforms, globalised virtual communities, digital content sharing and the e-commerce revolution, amongst other things over the last two decades.

However, recent news, and specifically an alleged “two-tier” internet proposal by Google-Verizon, has highlighted the fragile nature of this concept. Rumours suggested these two companies would allow Internet Service Provider (ISPs) to offer increased bandwidth to consumers in return for premium bundled services and at the expense of other content. ⁽¹⁾

Essentially, providers would have a chance to mould the digital environment how they want … and then charge for it; the hope being that access to a reliable and fast service would be enough to encourage consumers to pay for something they currently receive for free. ISPs would also stand to gain through charging content providers for pipe-lining data, with charges tiered by the amount of capacity provided.

Google and Verizon flatly denied any such “deal” ⁽²⁾ and have gone to lengths to explain that their guidelines would still protect the “public” internet. However, these guidelines seem to be exclusive of wireless networks, and there is a proviso for ISPs to discriminate “specialist content.”⁽³⁾

While the debate continues, the clear danger for consumers is the sidelining of “free” and “open” content. Imagine trying to access a “lower tier” online service where access and load times are dependent on bandwidth spikes and troughs of paid-for content; possibly to the point where the lower tier content is almost unusable at given times.

However, at present, the general public remains largely unaware of these issues. Findings from a study conducted by GfK NOP in October to a representative sample of UK adults found that only 6% claimed to be fully aware of issues around “Net Neutrality”, with 15% admitting little knowledge of the implication despite recognising the term.

Nevertheless, once the implications were made apparent, consumer opinion was stronger: 72%  agreed all websites should have the ability to present their content with no one site having preference over another, with 70%  stating they should have the right to access content at any time with no limitations. When asked whether they would be willing to pay to guarantee the best possible internet experience (when accessing HD movies etc.) only 13% of the sample said that they would. It would seem that if these issues were made more transparent to consumers, then the majority would prefer for equal access to continue.

Net Neutrality will continue to remain controversial, particularly with legislators showing little consistency in their moves to support telecommunications companies/content providers or consumers across different countries.

The natural conclusion would be to educate people further, so that public opinion can be better informed and to ensure the final decision is not just left to small groups of people who are “in the know”.  After all, the internet is one of the biggest democracies we have and it would be a real shame to throw that away.

REFERENCES

(1)   

(2)   

(3)   

IMAGE CREDITS

http://flic.kr/p/5csKS4

No related posts.

Tags: Awareness, , Internet, Net Neutrality, Openness, Public debate, Research, Verizon