net neutrality has far more to do with being a money grab by ISP's than it does deciding what content is allowed on the internet. If there ever was going to be a bipartisan issue, this would be it
internet service providers want to create a fee-based structure like you see with cable tv. it's what they have in some european countries, like portugal, and they want it used in america. Use cable TV as the example. Your internet bill would look something like:
$24.99 basic service ... more or less simply connectivity with ability to run a few searches that take you to blocked content you don't pay for
then the add-on services each anchored by a big name service:
$8.99 email
$10.99 shopping suite (ebay, amazon, overstock, newegg)
$4.99 news suite (fox, nbc, abc, cnn)
$11.99 social media suite (twitter, fb, insta)
$24.99 netflix and youtube
$8.99 espn streaming suite (which is coming this summer btw)
$4.99 fox sports streaming suite
$4.99 nbc sports streaming suite
etc, etc, etc
while it doesn't specifically "block" content it does charge you for content you are currently accessing with one price that is based on speed and/or usage. The effect here is that if you buy the netflix/youtube package then what happens with hulu or, even worse, a new service that is going to do it better than all of them. If they don't get picked up by your ISP you will never access them whether or not you are willing to pay for it which stymies content, ingenuity, and creates a monopoly in a technology (movie streaming) that is still in its infancy
so I'm not too worried about a china or north korea type of content management angle here but i believe the cost of internet services will spiral completely out of control and will drastically slow the pace of innovation in a technology still in it's childhood.
Right now you're probably paying about $75 for very fast internet allowing you to stream perfectly on several devices. when the ISPs have their way this will be $200/mo and will lock in a few hundred companies, thus locking out the next-gen innovators.
internet service providers want to create a fee-based structure like you see with cable tv. it's what they have in some european countries, like portugal, and they want it used in america. Use cable TV as the example. Your internet bill would look something like:
$24.99 basic service ... more or less simply connectivity with ability to run a few searches that take you to blocked content you don't pay for
then the add-on services each anchored by a big name service:
$8.99 email
$10.99 shopping suite (ebay, amazon, overstock, newegg)
$4.99 news suite (fox, nbc, abc, cnn)
$11.99 social media suite (twitter, fb, insta)
$24.99 netflix and youtube
$8.99 espn streaming suite (which is coming this summer btw)
$4.99 fox sports streaming suite
$4.99 nbc sports streaming suite
etc, etc, etc
while it doesn't specifically "block" content it does charge you for content you are currently accessing with one price that is based on speed and/or usage. The effect here is that if you buy the netflix/youtube package then what happens with hulu or, even worse, a new service that is going to do it better than all of them. If they don't get picked up by your ISP you will never access them whether or not you are willing to pay for it which stymies content, ingenuity, and creates a monopoly in a technology (movie streaming) that is still in its infancy
so I'm not too worried about a china or north korea type of content management angle here but i believe the cost of internet services will spiral completely out of control and will drastically slow the pace of innovation in a technology still in it's childhood.
Right now you're probably paying about $75 for very fast internet allowing you to stream perfectly on several devices. when the ISPs have their way this will be $200/mo and will lock in a few hundred companies, thus locking out the next-gen innovators.
