From frantically conducting research on a paper due in twelve hours to habitually checking Facebook during said research, college students make use of an open Internet on a consistent basis. Equality of access to varied sources of information is the defining characteristic of the open Internet. That principle of equal access, however, suffered a serious defeat at the start of this year when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit struck down key parts of net neutrality, the broad term used to refer to federal policies that prohibit broadband companies (e.g, Verizon and Comcast) from giving favored treatment to any online content. Without a neutral Internet, customers of companies that are willing to pay a high price for Internet “fast lanes,” such as Netflix and Google, would receive preferential access, whereas startup companies unable to shoulder the expenses of high-speed content would struggle. More importantly for the realm of higher education, the loss of the open Internet would present a series of challenges to the fundamental mission of colleges and universities everywhere.
Currently, the central issue is how the Federal Communications Commission will choose to reformulate its Internet policies. Earlier this year, the agency received widespread criticism after the release of a preliminary proposal which would have made it possible for companies to make deals with ISPs for “paid prioritization” of their content, placing them in an Internet “fast lane.” The public has certainly made its sentiments known, submitting more than 3.7 million comments by the close of the FCC’s period for public comment on its proposal. In response, the FCC has begun holding a series of “open-internet roundtables” which are intended to include dialogue on the enforcement of “Open Internet” rules, as part of an ongoing discussion about the formation of new Internet policies.
If anything can be gained from reports on these discussions, however, it is the fact that the FCC seems rather unsure of itself. In the immediate wake of the public comment period, no substantive choices have been made and the agency is still in a fact-gathering mode. By taking an extended amount of time, the FCC may make the proper choice, yet it also might talk itself into a weaker set of regulations despite its expressed support for net neutrality.
If the FCC does not enforce strict regulations aimed at preserving net neutrality, the realm of higher education stands to suffer. Indeed, the potential loss of net neutrality endangers the core mission of colleges and universities. As a prominent institution of higher education, the University depends on equal access to online information in order to encourage research and stimulate collaboration between various scholars. The University also is a key provider of various educational and civic resources to the public, both within Charlottesville and beyond. Without strong enforcement of the principles of net neutrality, students and faculty alike will inevitably have to pay fees to receive prioritized transmission of the University’s content and services. If the University and other institutions are not able to provide online educational content as well as other content of general interest to the public at a pace and quality equivalent to that of commercial suppliers, academic content will be downgraded to an inferior position. Inevitably, this pattern will affect low-income students who cannot afford to pay for premium internet access. Indeed, even if the University were to subsidize the cost of faster internet speeds, whether for the entire student body or solely for those who need financial aid, the potential cost to the University would be staggering.
Since educational and non-profit websites are more likely to be consigned to a slow lane in a non-neutral Internet, students attempting to access library services and other academic resources could face numerous hindrances. For-profit competitors who can afford to pay the fees for better access could conceivably edge out free and open source web tools, as well as wikis and other collaborative sites, that enable educators to share content. The higher education system has grown dependent on online resources to such a degree that any threat to net neutrality will devastate the principle of equality of access on which institutions of learning are founded. The prospect of a tiered Internet sets a risky precedent for education, in that the content and tools that students and faculty use may be subject to corporate interests. Such a system would severely threaten the ideal of education as a public good.
The implications of paid prioritization will undoubtedly affect the Internet’s ability to positively influence the quality and accessibility of education. The Association of American Universities (of which the University is a member) has already made its views known by submitting comments to the FCC to encourage the adoption of strong rules enforcing net neutrality. Hopefully, in the weeks ahead, the FCC will hear the voice of the public. Without unequivocal rules aimed at preserving net neutrality, the intellectual freedom of the educational community is at stake.
Conor Kelly is an Opinion columnist for The Cavalier Daily. He can be reached at c.kelly@cavalierdaily.com.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Scapegoating students will not stop hazing
By Editorial Board | 12 hours agoInstead of retroactively responding to extreme hazing allegations, we, and especially the University, must begin asking more probing questions about the role of fraternal organizations on Grounds.
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoOur independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
ARRAS: U.Va. must revise the Sexual Assault Prevention Training module
By Aoife Arras | April 17, 2024In addition to its failures in interactivity, the module lacks details specific to the University and discusses key concepts in universal terms.
