Net Neutrality is as according to the White House the principle that internet providers treat internet traffic equally, basically everyone has the same shot on the internet. The amount of money a company has does not effect their ability to get internet traffic. There has been several attempts at Congressional involvement on the issue of net neutrality all of them have failed. Obama announced his position in a statement from the White house last year. In his statement he says, “Net neutrality has been built into the fabric of the Internet since its creation — but it is also a principle that we cannot take for granted. We cannot allow Internet service providers (ISPs) to restrict the best access or to pick winners and losers in the online marketplace for services and ideas. That is why today, I am asking the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to answer the call of almost 4 million public comments, and implement the strongest possible rules to protect net neutrality.” In April of 2006 a wide range of companies and cooperation banned together to form the website savetheinternet.com for real net neutrality and in of Net Neutrality. President Obama’s position on the issue of Net Neutrality is one that is late to the game, but valued by the community. It was the Federal Communications Commission that started to make this movement when it announced it was looking into reclassifying the internet and how it is regulated. Now at the core, Net Neutrality is as follows, “Network neutrality is best defined as a network design principle. The idea is that a maximally useful public information network aspires to treat all content, sites, and platforms equally.” That was just a snapshot of what the man who coined the phrase, Tim Wu, from an article in the Digital Trends website. The rules provided via the FCC would allow, for the first time, cable companies like Comcast and Verizon to charge tech companies (Netflix, Youtube, news websites) to bring content to consumers more quickly. From a CBS report, “Netflix, for example, might pay a premium to ensure that its customers can stream movies more reliably. At a cost start-up companies might not be able to afford.” In reality, it would give these big companies the ability to slow down certain websites and speed up others at their whim. Now. many big companies would obviously put it in other ways to sway the public to favor their side. In a CNBC article, AT&T CEO, who obviously isn’t biased, said, “The newly proposed net neutrality rules by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) amount to regulation of the Internet that would stifle growth and innovation of online services and technology solutions.” The way he puts it, and many of these big companies put it, makes it seem like they are helping the consumer. Well. That sounds nice and all, but it is a bold faced lie to the American public. The reason for the change of minds within the FCC comes from a lawsuit at the hands of Comcast. Who wants to control the internets. For a period of time, during discussions between Netflix and Comcast, Comcast lowered the speed of Netflix so low, that they conceded to Comcast. Comcast at one point spent $18.8 million in government lobbies. They were only outspend by defense contractor Northrop Grumman. When you dig to find who is fighting and why, you can see why at a later point Obama came in to make a stand. It was immediately rebutted by Republican Senator Ted Cruz. Who in a tweet called it the “Obamacare of the Internet.” It makes you wonder who he is actually serving in Congress. Recently the FCC voted to treat the internet as they did with Telecommunications in the 1930s, and treat it as “common carriers,” which is good. Attached below is John Oliver explaining Net Neutrality.