Advocates of network neutrality contend that any non-neutral scheme could allow ISPs to unfairly discriminate and control which data they prioritize, such as data from their own sponsors or media interests.
Save the Internet.com – “[These companies] want to be Internet gatekeepers, deciding which Web sites go fast or slow and which won’t load at all”…”tax content providers to guarantee speedy delivery of their data.”…”to discriminate in favor of their own search engines, Internet phone services, and streaming video — while slowing down or blocking their competitors”…”to reserve express lanes for their own content and services.”
“Net Neutrality is the Internet’s First Amendment.” Save the Internet on Opposing Views.com.: “Consumers take it for granted that every Web site and application on the Internet is treated equally. That’s because it had been that way for much of the Internet’s early history. Until 2005 we had fundamental protections in the law that guarantee nondiscrimination on the Internet. But that has changed.
Timothy Karr. “Opinion: Neutrality Protects Internet’s Openness.” AOL News. February 2010: “Net neutrality simply means “no discrimination,” and this user-powered architecture is the reason the Internet has become such a powerful engine for consumer choice and democratic empowerment.”
“Access and the Internet.” New York Times Editorial. August 29, 2009″: “On the Internet today, a Web site run by a solo blogger can load as quickly as any corporate home page. Internet service providers, including leading cable and phone companies, want to be able to change that so they can give priority to businesses that pay, or make deals with, them.
A good bill that would guarantee so-called net neutrality has been introduced in the House. Congress should pass it, and the Obama administration should use its considerable power to make net neutrality the law.”