On Thursday, the Justice Department dismissed Net neutrality, “the principle that all Internet sites should be equally accessible to any Web user,” and told the Federal Communications Commission, which is reviewing high-speed Internet practices” that “Internet service providers should be allowed to charge a fee for priority Web traffic.” The Department claimed that Net neutrality “could hamper development of the Internet and prevent service providers from upgrading or expanding their networks.”

In reality, rather than stifling economic development, Net neutrality has led to economic innovation and growth. According to Business Week, investment in free and open internet access “plays a vital role in stimulating economic growth and productivity–more so than money spent on roads, electricity, or even education.” High speed internet for all “makes it easier and cheaper for all kinds of workers to place orders, service customers, and drive up new business.”

The push to abolish Net neutrality is led by “the nation’s largest telephone and cable companies — including AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner…They want to tax content providers to guarantee speedy delivery of their data…[and] discriminate in favor of their own search engines, Internet phone services, and streaming video — while slowing down or blocking their competitors.”

The Department’s decision would thus undermine small businesses, innovators, political advocates, bloggers, and non profit organizations who are financially unable to pay the fees for priority speeds. According to David Weinberger, a fellow with the Harvard University Law School’s Berkman Center for Internet & Society, “if the people who carry the packets, carry the bits, get to prefer certain ideas, whether they’re political or economic, then a useful principle of democracy is weakened.”

In fact, if the mainstream media is any indication, a two-tier pay-for-access Internet system would filter for unpopular political expression and favor conventional corporate wisdom.

The Justice Department must live up to its mission statement and “ensure fair and impartial administration of justice for all Americans,” not just the administration’s campaign contributors.

This entry was is filed under Corruption, Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.