Com125 Assignment 12: Network Neutrality

What is network neutrality? According to wikipedia.org, Network neutrality is principles that is applied to residential broadband networks, and potentially to all networks. Network neutrality preserves a free and open internet. Overtime there has been a lot of debate over network neutrality and what it actually means. In the article, "Net Neutrality Debate Remains Continuous", by K.C. Jones, states, "Net neutrality is so contentious that many people debating it cannot even agree on a definition. Traditional allies and foes have rearranged themselves to form strange new alliances and divisions. Even the founders of the Internet and the World Wide Web -- including some who worked alongside each other -- are at odds over how to move forward". People still can't come agree on what net neutrality actually is. Now people are debating on whether internet service providers be able to charge more money for traffic, or whether the law should mandate equal access. Why are internet providers trying to gain more money because of traffic. It wouldn't be fair for networks with more traffic to charge more money. This is because there are some website that a lot of people visit and go to which have a lot of traffic. Like a lot of people use yahoo and google. It wouldn't be right to charge them more because those to sites are frequently used to search for things.

According to Jones, Jones states, "Some telecommunications executives have argued that they should be able to prioritize information from sources paying higher fees or serving higher purposes. A prioritized system, which would create an Internet fast lane for higher-paying content providers, would help fund network improvements, according to Internet service providers". I don't think if information was prioritized and paying higher fees will serve as an higher purpose. I feel people are just greedy and try to make as much money as possible. What they should be more concerned about instead of making more money with traffic flow is stopping all the virus and spam from floating around the internet. People maybe more happier if they weren't getting all of those pop-ups and viruses rather than how much traffic is going on. Also stated by Jones is, "Net neutrality opponents, including President Bill Clinton's former press secretary Mike McCurry, also argue that Internet service providers should be able to direct heavy traffic and screen out some material, like viruses and spam". If network neutrality is free and open internet then there should be no viruses and internet services providers should not charge for traffic. If internet service providers charge for more traffic than it won't be considered network neutrality.

People who use the internet are all affected by these debates that are going on. Nobody wants to pay for anything. Thats like a common thing in the u.s. . Anything thats free and has easy access with less stress involved is the type of stuff we like. Most Americans are going to be for network neutrality. Music musicians are even network neutrality. As stated in the article, " Rock The Net", it states, "As musicians and entrepreneurs, we understand the importance of treating all websites equally -- from the busiest online music store to the smallest blog. We urge Congress to support network neutrality.". If websites weren't treated equally people probably wouldn't visit those sites as much as they used to. Being treated fairly is all worth its while. I support network neutrailty because its free and an open source internet. I wouldn't want to pay for anything. I never want to pay for anything. Its hard to come by living today with just one job. I can only imagine how much a internet services provider would charge it there was alot of traffic involved with one website. Therefore i'm all for it.

Com125 Assignment 10: Journalism

What is journalism? Journalism is the occupation of reporting, writing, editing, photographing, or broadcasting news or of conducting any news organization as a business. Journalist provide the people in the world with insightful information about what's going on in our daily lives. I their weren't journalist people would be dumb founded about what's going on in society. They tend to be a good reliable source. Critics can and usually blow up a situation and make it look more serious then it really is. There are hot new topics occurring in the news everyday. Each news topic may not say exactly the same thing. Often articles vary from each publisher.

One of the most recent topics in the news today is about church members who protest at funerals. According to the USA Today in the article "Church liable for protest at funeral" by Alan Gomez states the jury gave a Marine's family nearly $11M in damages. (Gomez, 2007) So this article is basically about church protesters who were sued for speaking cruel phrases during the funeral of Lance Cpl Matthew Snyder who was a former Marine killed in Iraq. These protesters created signs saying "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "God hates fags". As you can see these actions are not appropriate for funeral settings definitely coming from church members.

I feel that these church people went a little over board with some of the stuff they said at the funeral. Thats just mad disrespectful towards peoples families. Some of the things they were saying about God isn't true. The church people were saying like God hates fags and God hates you is not correct. First of all God doesn't hate anyone, they would know this if they read the bible. Haven't those people ever heard that song yes Jesus loves me for the bible tells me so. God doesn't condone any ungodly acts. I'm not about to get into any of this bible stuff right now. Just looking at the pictures and reading about the things these protesters are doing and saying is upsetting me and I'm not the type to really get upset. The more I think about it the more I get upset.

The article basically broken down in full descriptive detail. They writer of this article clearly breaks down who was sued, how the money from the law suit was distributed, describes past protesting incidents, talks about states passing laws against protesters, the way some of the people felt, and and the location the incident happened. The journalist who wrote this article also has a picture in the middle of the article of the protesters which shows the types of signs they were holding. On the website the chicagotribune.com , the article called "The church behind the protesters" provided by Tribune news services, gives little description behind what happened. The article on the website does not have a picture like the article in the newspaper. The write up on the website is very brief; it basically just states who was involved and how much money was won in the case. It also goes into depth about why the protester are taking their actions. This article is more focused on how the protesters feel compared to the one in the newspaper which is more about how the victims of this situation felt. Newspapers usually have tiny print and big bold headings. Online is more colorful. People are starting to get their news from the internet instead of leaving their homes to go buy a newspaper. Internet news is becoming more convenient.