Creation of The Internet Has Changed the World Discussion
Table of Contents
|Order ID# 45178248544XXTG457
|Plagiarism Level: 0-0.5%
|Writer Classification: PhD competent
|Delivery: Minimum 3 Hours
|Course Level: Masters/University College
|Guarantee Status: 96-99%
Creation of The Internet Has Changed the World Discussion
Respond to at least three classmates by taking and defending the opposing position.
The creation of the internet has changed the world. Not only do Americans have access to limitless
libraries of information and content, but their ability to purchase goods and services from online
businesses has grown exponentially. The jaw dropping expansion of internet enterprises–as well as the
inexpensive products and services they provide–can be attributed to the freedom the internet has
enjoyed from government regulations over a majority of the past two decades. But this all changed in
2015 when the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)–under order from the previous
Administration–instituted a policy called the Open Internet Order. The policy, commonly referred to as net
neutrality, overturned decades of precedent that treated the internet as a realm where private individuals
and groups could freely act and express ideas without the presence of government intervention–harming
innovation and thwarting the ability of businesses to freely compete for consumer dollars. While the term,
“net neutrality,” conveys ideas of individual and business equity, the misleading phrase actually means
government regulation of the internet.The previous Administration’s decision to apply the same rules to
the internet as they did to the telecommunications industry of the early twentieth century was a mistake.
The internet is quite different than traditional utilities–such as electricity or water. The expensive upfront
investments that lead to monopolies in these industries don’t apply to internet service providers (ISP). In
fact, while there are only a handful of traditional utility providers, there are roughly 4,400 ISPs across the
country. When this level of competition is naturally present, government involvement will only impede
internet consumers and businesses alike.But there’s good news. The new FCC chairman has taken a hard
stance on the issue–vowing to open up the internet to pure free market competition once again. By
removing the policy of net neutrality, the Trump Administration and his FCC chairman will not only remove
government barriers from internet commerce, but will allow internet companies to thrive and consumer
needs to be met more efficiently. (informationstation.org)
The government regulating access would create a more effective internet. In Chapter 16-4i under “Does
Information Want to Be Free” it states that giant media corporations who take advantage of their market
power and hardball tactics to enrich themselves at our expense. Social media like Facebook treat their
users like unpaid laborers, profiting from the content that users upload, without sharing the profits from
advertisers with Internet users. Corporations use copyrights and patents to control the internet. (Chapter
16-4i) Under these references, it sounds to me like the free market regulation really is paid for by the
users not corporations. If the government were regulating the effectiveness of the internet they would
want to tax for what they control. This would be regulated the same for all internet users, not price varying
like corporations manages. If we are focusing on “effectiveness of the internet” it is referenced in Chapter
16-4i under “Government: Hands Off or Hands On?” that government involvement could limit freedoms of
privacy, safety and morality. (Chapter 16-4i) But this is at least being ran in a regimented fashion. What
would large corporations do for internet crimes like terrorism or identity theft for internet users? They
don’t have the authority to police these types of crimes. The government does, making it a more efficient
option for the cost of taxation and internet freedoms.
- I would not usually take this particular side, but in this case, I would side with Government regulation. Because more damage could potentially be done with the free market. America is not restricted, like other countries when it comes to web browsing. All though I am entirely for the freedom we have by this. I still think this opens up to many dangers, and as the textbook references, we should take our responsibility to protect our-self online. Some people may not be capable of doing this or have the common sense or knowledge to protect themselves. Also, even though it is common knowledge that the government can and does track web traffic. I do not see any harm in this. As long as you are not committing a crime, there should not be an issue with the Government knowing what you are up to. Again this just increases our, safety if you are not doing anything wrong what difference does it make if the Government see what you google and what website you visit. The free market will always have the same common core at the bottom line, which is money. Therefore, public safety is not their main concern and may not be a concern at all. Also, allowing a few multi-billion dollar companies run everything will again in some way end up with a strain on the people financially. As well as some of the most significant profits to be made are typically doing dangerous and unethical things.
The background and significance of the problem and a clear statement of the research purpose is provided. The search history is mentioned.
Content is well-organized with headings for each slide and bulleted lists to group related material as needed. Use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. to enhance readability and presentation content is excellent. Length requirements of 10 slides/pages or less is met.
More depth/detail for the background and significance is needed, or the research detail is not clear. No search history information is provided.
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is little integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are included. Summary of information presented is included. Conclusion may not contain a biblical integration.
Content is somewhat organized, but no structure is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects, etc. is occasionally detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met.
The background and/or significance are missing. No search history information is provided.
Review of relevant theoretical literature is evident, but there is no integration of studies into concepts related to problem. Review is partially focused and organized. Supporting and opposing research are not included in the summary of information presented. Conclusion does not contain a biblical integration.
There is no clear or logical organizational structure. No logical sequence is apparent. The use of font, color, graphics, effects etc. is often detracting to the presentation content. Length requirements may not be met
You Can Also Place the Order at www.perfectacademic.com/orders/ordernow or www.crucialessay.com/orders/ordernow