You might be hearing the term "net neutrality" bandied about on the news this week, as the Federal Communications Commission approved a plan proposed by FCC chairman Tom Wheeler that could make it more difficult to access certain sites.
Under Wheeler's plan, the FCC would consider permitting "paid prioritization," which would allow Internet service providers to charge companies like YouTube and Netflix for faster connection speeds to users.
The cost of this "fast lane" access would likely trickle down to consumers, as Netflix and others would presumably hike their subscription rates in an effort to offset their own costs.
Why does this matter to us?
At the moment, all content on the Internet is treated equally, so mega-sites like Amazon aren't given any sort of preferential treatment over other, smaller sites. That's what net neutrality means - equal access to everything on the Internet.
Given that fair net-neutrality regulations are put in place by the FCC, users would be able to rest easy with the knowledge that no website would have priority over any other. New Internet businesses would stand a snowball's chance of competing against the big boys.
But the FCC voted 3-2 Thursday to approve Wheeler's plan, along with its paid prioritization proposal, which net neutrality supporters (like libraries) oppose.
"If your ability to access information is limited by decisions about which Internet service you can equitably access, then your ability to read, listen to, or see content protected by the First Amendment will be restricted," says Robert Hubsher, executive director of the Ramapo Catskill Library System.
What can you do?
Contact the FCC  (they've created a new inbox specifically for open Internet comments) and your legislators and tell them how you feel about net neutrality.

 Website

 Events

 Services

 Research Tools
 Community
 Contact