The definition of "ghetto" per Merriam-Webster online: a part of a city in which members of a particular group or race live usually in poor conditions.

That might soon extend to the Internet thanks to the recent ruling in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, which decided that the FCC, which governs telecommunications and standards, did not have the authority to put rules in place governing how ISPs manage their Internet traffic.

This is not the end of net neutrality. As lead mobile analyst, Sascha Segan put it in a recent PCMag Live broadcast, the FCC has the option to appeal, so the issue could end up adjudicated by the Supreme Court.

If it goes that far, the Supreme Court will hopefully make the right decision. The problem with the lack of net neutrality regulations and allowing ISPs to dictate Internet traffic bandwidth, traffic priority, and content, is that we face the very real danger of having Internet ghettos, or pockets of IP addresses in locations where many of the citizens are not wealthy and influential. An Internet ghetto could mean slower and filtered access.

Without fiercely guarding net neutrality, ISPs could assign higher-priced, top-tier service to customers and provide them with the fastest, most robust bandwidth. Guess what that means? If you are poor and can't afford top-level service, you won't get equal access to the Internet. Your access might be slow and choppy. Guess what else? It's safe to assume that ISPs will put more dollars into networking infrastructure in wealthier locations with residents and businesses that can afford to pay for top-level services and ignore areas with poorer subscribers.

What else? Well, let's say a Rupert Murdoch, or some gazillionaire with a political agenda to push, decides he wants to buy an ISP. What is to stop him from providing top-tier service to websites that are in line with his political views while throttling or maybe even blocking content that provides alternative viewpoints?

Imagine if we did the same with electricity. Rich neighborhoods and lucrative businesses pay more for electricity, so they get 24/7 juice. The rest of us? You have a second-tier service, so you can run electricity from 5-8 a.m. and then 7-11 p.m. Think that's far-fetched? Ask anyone from Ukraine how their government distributes heat.

The bottom line is U.S. Internet access should be considered a utility. Gas, electricity, and water are democratized. Internet access should not be dictated by private industry alone. Net neutrality needs to be law, our politicians must understand and take technology issues more serious, and we need to keep vigilant over any company that wants to regulate our main source of information, the Internet, for profit.

For more, check out Net Neutrality Rules Struck Down: Should You Care?

Further Reading

Networking Reviews