Author: d2forsaken

Self Reflection – D2Forsaken

Core Value 1. My work demonstrates that I used a variety of social and interactive practices that involve recursive stages of exploration, discovery, conceptualization, and development.

When writing my essay I realized that I couldn’t just sit down on one single day and write it. I had to take steps when writing this as in writing and getting feedback in order to fix my errors I had. If writing took one step and was finished we wouldn’t have to take a class for it. At some points, I realized that I even needed to turn back and do some more research. Doing so made me realize there was more to Net Neutrality then just the internet. There was a whole concept behind it on things such as without Net Neutrality, ISPs would have full control of our internet use. I developed new ideas and it was able to help me with my essay.

Core Value 2. My work demonstrates that I read critically, and that I placed texts into conversation with one another to create meaning by synthesizing ideas from various discourse communities. 

After evaluating and considering my resources, I selected evidence from each that would allow me to efficiently and effectively address all aspects of my argument. I strategically placed some of the cited pieces in paragraphs that I felt accurately reinforced the idea they each individually highlighted. I then chose to place other cited elements in paragraphs that I felt I could challenge to make my overall argument better. After each citation, I thoroughly explained how it connected to my main argument and analyzed the message each author attempted to portray to their readers. I then built off my opinions and knowledge along with the authors’ opinions and thoughts to leave no room for my readers to hesitate on which stance to take on this topic.

 Core Value 3. My work demonstrates that I rhetorically analyzed the purpose, audience, and contexts of my own writing and other texts and visual arguments.

While doing the Visual Rhetoric, it taught me to pay attention to even the smallest details of a scene. Doing the Visual Rhetoric with no volume allowed me to use my interpretation. This showed me that I had to paint a clear picture throughout my essay in order to keep my audience on my side. Even with my rebuttal, I had to have a counter argument so people know I was FOR Net Neutrality. The rebuttal was a way to try to break the ice on my side trying to prove me wrong but I was able to counter it with my points. By using the visual aid it allowed me to prove my evidence even more and further keep my side on top of things.

Core Value 4: My work demonstrates that I have met the expectations of academic writing by locating, evaluating, and incorporating illustrations and evidence to support my own ideas and interpretations.

I was able to find my quotes through articles and authors that I found trustworthy. With the articles in hand, I was able to find specific details in them that I needed for my essay. Using these quotes helped me to make my side heavier and harder to counter. Explaining the quote made me realize that the quote has a much larger meaning then what the actual quote says itself. Doing the Annotated Bibliography helped me analyze my sources further and made me think about whether or not it would help me with my essay. Also while trying to pick sources to use at specific times I was able to look at my Bibliography and see what each article was talking about instead of skimming through each article over and over again.

Core Value 5. My work demonstrates that I respect my ethical responsibility to represent complex ideas fairly and to the sources of my information with appropriate citation. 

Maintaining academic honesty is an important thing to give credit to those who had the ideas. I gave credit to all my sources and used the quotes as they were intended in the original articles. I used many different sources which allowed me to further expand on quotes to back up ideas on Net Neutrality. Even with my Rebuttal, I explained their quotes the same way as I did with all the quotes, showing that even the wrong side matters. I also explained what the sources meant in the Annotated Bibliography and cited each source in the proper APA format. The reference section at the bottom of the paper also showed that I cited my pictures.

Causal Rewrite – D2Forsaken

In order to preserve the equality of the internet we must established protective measure to ensure Net Neutrality and keep the internet equal. All in all, the internet is here to stay and is not going anywhere anytime soon. The problem the internet now possess to the general population is how to handle it, should The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) keep Net Neutrality or should they repeal what Obama implemented back in 2015. An end to Net Neutrality would create cries of outrage. People have now acclimated to the idea of the internet over the past few years and have witnessed first hand the possibilities that the internet presents. Keeping Net Neutrality would allow for companies small and large to gain customers. Consumers can have equal speeds on every website allowing everyone to access what they want when they want. Companies no longer have to compete or pay extra to make sure they get out there first, all companies can receive the same amount of commercial time for generally the same price. Countries without Net Neutrality are making their people suffer. “Slow-lanes”, blocking websites, and creating setbacks for certain companies is just inappropriate. Internet users should not have so many restrictions and limits; businesses should not be punished for opinions. Ending Net Neutrality would cause too many problems if the Internet Service Providers were aloud to control our daily lives. No one should be aloud to control the daily lives of millions of people. Not even a force as powerful as the internet.

References:

  1. Kasana, Mehreen. “Here’s How Repealing Net Neutrality Could Change The Way You Use The Internet.” Bustle, Bustle, 13 Nov. 2018, www.bustle.com/p/how-does-net-neutrality-affect-you-your-internet-habits-could-change-dramatically-7542713
  2. Donnelly, G. (n.d.). What Net Neutrality Means for You and Your Time Online. Retrieved November 29, 2018, from http://fortune.com/2017/11/21/what-net-neutrality-means-for-you/

Research – D2Forsaken

The Internet is Coming to an End

The internet is a fascinating system. Developed over two decades ago, the internet has now evolved into a powerful and unstoppable force. Yet, everything that involves humans must have its flaws. These flaws must be protected and depending on the goodness of people is not enough. When the internet was created in the late 1900s, no one thought it would ever turn into the controversial topic that it is today because so many people enjoyed it with almost no complaints. However, the internet has now taken a step into the spotlight and has become a major concern. Policies need to be made to protect, advance, and preserve the internet. Net Neutrality does all of those things for the internet and its users. Therefore, mankind needs to make every possible attempt to preserve Net Neutrality. Or else who knows, the internet might die before mankind can reach extinction.

Net Neutrality also allows for equal Internet Speeds for everyone and Internet Service Providers can’t pick and choose who gets faster internet. According to Joe Curtis author of “The Pros and Cons of Net Neutrality”, “At its core, net neutrality is the concept that all internet traffic should be treated fairly, without unfairly penalising or prioritising traffic from a given domain, service or publisher.” These policies allow internet users to use the internet without any discrimination. Regardless of their income, ethnicity, or gender, anyone is allowed to use the internet as they please. Without these policies, Internet Providers would have the ability to control their distribution of speeds to their customers. Author, Clint Finley, of “Here’s How the End of Net Neutrality Will Change the Internet,” argued that “INTERNET SERVICE PROVIDERS like Comcast and Verizon may soon be free to block content, slow video-streaming services from rivals, and offer “fast lanes” to preferred partners.” If a company prefers Yahoo over Google, they’re going to slow down the speed of Google under certain carries. Allowing Yahoo to become the more dominant search engine, increasing their profit. The only possible way for Google to become “faster” is to pay more which could put Google at a higher risk of going out of business altogether. This scenario could also be applied to situations involving normal, every-day people. Internet Providers would give everyone these “slow lanes” and the only way out of them is to pay extra for “fast lanes” and those faster speeds might still not even be good enough. Mobile devices would see the most drastic change since consumers already have limits on them. Internet Providers could shrink the amount of data you are able to use and make it more expensive to access more than the current given amount. Mehreen Kasana, author of “Here’s How Repealing Net Neutrality Could Change The Way You Use The Internet”, explains thoroughly why the internet is so important and essential for its consumers’ to protect through Net Neutrality, “This set of rules protects everyday internet users, like you and me, from the whims of massive corporations looking to make an extra buck. Net neutrality mandates companies to treat all internet data as equal. They can’t speed up, slow down, or hide any kind of internet content from users.” Which is exactly why mankind needs Net Neutrality. Without its policies, large corporations will nickel and dime its customers for every last penny they have. Without Net Neutrality, internet speeds will become throttled and people will have to pay more to access certain content. In order to preserve the equality of the internet, we must protect Net Neutrality and ensure that the internet remains equal.

One of the major necessities of Net Neutrality involves students. In this technological age, pretty much every student needs the internet in order to complete assignments for school. Most of the work that is done on the internet now would not be possible without Net Neutrality. Students would not be able to do their homework. Finley Klint, author of “FCC Plan to Kill Net Neutrality Rules Could Hurt Students,” claims that “Video plays a growing role in the education of students like Williams who turn to video conferencing, streaming lectures, and other forms of high-tech distance learning to complete or extend their educations.” Clearly, without Net Neutrality existing to protect the access of students on the internet, students like Nichole Williams would not be able to learn. Leaving the high possibility of more failures in school because students won’t be able to afford the prices if Net Neutrality is repealed. Resulting in more dropouts and increasing the number of our nation’s unemployed. If it gets repealed, Ms. Williams will fall into the trap of “slow lanes” and she will be forced to pay to get out of it. She lives by the City so online learning is important to her because she doesn’t have to drive in order to get the quality education she needs to graduate and to succeed in the workforce. Without Net Neutrality “major ISPs will be able to promote the media companies they own — like this one — while punishing competitors’ offerings”, according to Paul Blumenthal, author of “What Net Neutrality Really Means For You (And For Us).” If a student has to do an assignment and the teacher tells them to use a source such as Fox News and their Internet Service Provider doesn’t like Fox News, that source might be blocked for them. If Internet Service Providers were able to control what a student can and cannot use it could result in many students becoming uneducated and unemployed. Inhibiting them from reaching their full potential.

On the other hand, people argue that Net Neutrality is a bad thing and that the internet should go back to its original policies. They that the internet was fine until Net Neutrality was introduced in 2015. The question of why it would be a bad idea to go back to the old way. Before Net Neutrality, consumers could pick and choose what they want instead of paying a big sum certain applications and cites that they did not need nor want. Arguing that some people would only use video and e-mail, so why must they pay for things that they are never going to use like games. Jesse Hathaway, the author of “Ending Net Neutrality Will Save the Internet, Not Destroy It,” stated, “No internet service provider wants to be known for having ‘slow service’ or being ‘anti-free-speech,’ so there’s nothing for consumers to worry about.” Since the Internet Service Providers want more consumers to use their internet, “slow service” would cause their reputation to be tarnished. Influencing their previously loyal customer to find go out and find other internet providers. So in the end, the absence of Net Neutrality would force the Internet Service Providers to the consider the benefits of their consumers more as a priority. The ISPs competition will grow with Net Neutrality allowing more people to join the business of becoming an ISP. The Tylt, the company that authored the article “Is the Death of Net Neutrality Actually Good for the Internet,”  wrote, “Internet service providers (ISPs) will now compete against each other, leading to better services and products for the consumer. Prices might actually go down.” Prices going down would cause more competition for consumers leading to more customers for Internet Service Providers. Charging people more or having more consumers? The answer for them would be pretty clear, critics of Net Neutrality claim, more customers would better their reputation and in turn gain their more customers. Allowing their company to make the most money possible. This would then cause a chain of events of people “flocking” to the Internet Service Provider who does not have “slow-lanes”.

People don’t like being blocked by others, but imagine if an Internet Service Provider was allowed to block a popular website with no other reason other than that they don’t “like” or agree with certain ideas and opinions shared on that website. So now consumers are stuck with using the Service Providers preferred websites. However, under Net Neutrality everyone would have access to any website that they wanted. Without it, Internet Service Providers would make companies pay for consumers to access them. Forcing companies to pay more and causing smaller companies such as Discord, a free app for people to chat with each other, to reach its demise. Small companies like Discord don’t have the finances to pay if they were forced to pay more just because an Internet Service Provider prefers a different messaging app. Net Neutrality allows for competition so the consumer gets to pick what they want to use instead of being forced to use one app. People get to express their feelings on whatever they want but if Net Neutrality was repealed every comment and opinion would be censored. Paul Blumenthal, author of “What Net Neutrality Really Means For You (And For Us),” refers to the following statement, “‘No one company should have the power to pick and choose which content reaches consumers and which doesn’t,’ Franken said. ‘Facebook, Google, and Amazon, like ISPs, should be neutral in their treatment of the flow of lawful information and commerce on their platform.'” The smaller companies should have the same opportunities to advertise to the masses like the larger corporations. The smaller businesses should not be punished for their size and platform. If the powerhouses, that are big businesses, were to control the internet, consumers would observe less of variety and be stuck with fewer choices.

With Net Neutrality, people are able to post inappropriate things that others don’t want to see. Without Net Neutrality we can deny people from doing that and make sure the internet is a safe place. With Net Neutrality you can restrict websites yourself but some are able to find ways to bypass that. But without Net Neutrality we could deny people who are underage from accessing certain websites without a verification of who they are first. While blocking sites like those it is possible to crack down on peer-to-peer file-sharing and make illegal downloads nearly impossible. People could also pay for only what they want and not extra things that are a waste of money. If people only want the internet and not cable, they could choose that on their plans. Instead of paying for two and only using one service, you could pay for just one service and be allowed to use that service. Also if you don’t use the internet a lot you could pay so you could only get it on the days/weeks you need it the most. Without Net Neutrality prices, overall carrier prices would go down for those who don’t need access to everything and for those who don’t need the fastest speed. Not only that, but it could also cause for fewer companies to pop up on the internet besides the “big” companies. Because Net Neutrality gives everyone an equal ISP causing equal customers so no one company can own the internet.” Net neutrality hurts ISPs because they pay to manage their buildings and offices, bringing them less profit,” says Monica Ramirez author of “Pros And Cons Of Net Neutrality.” With Net Neutrality giving companies equal benefits, and not charging us the consumer it’s forced to charge companies like Netflix. Charging Netflix more to be on their provider than makes us the consumer pay even more money a month to access it.

The dilemma that the end of Net Neutrality presents is all the negative outcomes. Keith Collins, author of “Net Neutrality Has Officially Been Repealed. Here’s How That Could Affect You,” is afraid of Net Neutrality ending and claims, “Many consumer advocates argued that once the rules were scrapped, broadband providers would begin selling the internet in bundles, not unlike cable television packages.” Right now for the internet, you pay for a “Bundle” and you receive access to everything: streaming, e-mail, videos, gaming, and much more. So if you want to access something like Facebook and Twitter, without Net Neutrality, you would have to pay for a “social media premium package”. Which would only allow you to access ONLY social media and may only include two cites. Which could possibly force consumers to pay even more to gain other Social Media sites. Let alone the amount of money they would have to spend on the cites they need on a daily basis. Meaning that life without Net Neutrality would be full of “pay-to-play deals”. Also allowing the gap between the rich and the poor to grow even further and possibly leading to the elimination of the middle class. Net Neutrality is a great possible solution to make sure that everyone is getting the same internet speed.

Fig. 1

Screen Shot 2018-11-30 at 9.56.41 AM

Without Net Neutrality giving us the ability to pay for bundles, the government is, therefore, guaranteeing that people will have to pay more. “If net neutrality is repealed in the United States, people may have to subscribe to internet packages based on their needs…For someone who uses all of these services on a daily and equal basis — like activists, journalists, teachers, and more — an internet without net neutrality would put a halt to their critical projects and professional networks,” according to Mehreen Kasana, author of “Here’s How Repealing Net Neutrality Could Change The Way You Use The Internet.” Which is becoming truer every day. The internet has become so dominant that you need a laptop or computer for school, to pay bills, and even to schedule doctors appointments. As everyone is turning to the internet for their information, careers are becoming dependent on the internet to the point of almost falling apart due to the demands. Journalists need the internet to be able to report on things that have happened over the weekend. As well as teachers need to be able to post things online for their students to access them. We live in a world where the internet has become a necessity in our lives and if we want it to continue on for many years to come we need to improve it. The majority of the population needs all the packages and if the United States loses Net Neutrality we could be seeing images, like the one below, pop up in our lives a lot more. If Net Neutrality were to be repealed only rich people and rich companies would be able to afford every cite and applications that they needed, while the rest of the general population would suffer. They would be forced to pick and choose what they felt they needed the most.

 

Fig. 2

Screen Shot 2018-11-30 at 2.03.13 PM.png

In order to preserve the equality of the internet, we must establish a protective measure to ensure Net Neutrality and keep the internet equal. All in all, the internet is here to stay and is not going anywhere anytime soon. The problem the internet now possess to the general population is how to handle it, should The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) keep Net Neutrality or should they repeal what Obama implemented back in 2015. An end to Net Neutrality would create cries of outrage. People have now acclimated to the idea of the internet over the past few years and have witnessed first hand the possibilities that the internet presence. Keeping Net Neutrality would allow for companies small and large to gain customers. Consumers can have equal speeds on every website allowing everyone to access what they want when they want. Companies no longer have to compete or pay extra to make sure they get out there first, all companies can receive the same amount of commercial time for generally the same price. Countries without Net Neutrality are making their people suffer. “Slow-lanes”, blocking websites, and creating setbacks for certain companies is just inappropriate. Internet users should not have so many restrictions and limits; businesses should not be punished for opinions. Ending Net Neutrality would cause too many problems if the Internet Service Providers were allowed to control our daily lives. No one should be allowed to control the daily lives of millions of people. Not even a force as powerful as the internet.

 

References:

  1. Blumenthal, Paul. “What Net Neutrality Really Means For You (And For Us).” The Huffington Post, TheHuffingtonPost.com, 26 Dec. 2017, www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/net-neutrality-good-bad_us_5a396d07e4b0860bf4ab9e6f
  2. Collins, Keith. “Net Neutrality Has Officially Been Repealed. Here’s How That Could Affect You.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/technology/net-neutrality-repeal.html
  3. Donnelly, G. (n.d.). What Net Neutrality Means for You and Your Time Online. Retrieved November 29, 2018, from http://fortune.com/2017/11/21/what-net-neutrality-means-for-you/
  4. Finley, Klint. “FCC Plan to Kill Net Neutrality Rules Could Hurt Students.” Wired, Conde Nast, 12 Dec. 2017, www.wired.com/story/fcc-plan-to-kill-net-neutrality-rules-could-hurt-students/
  5. Finley, Klint. “Here’s How the End of Net Neutrality Will Change the Internet.” Wired, Conde Nast, 6 Mar. 2018, www.wired.com/story/heres-how-the-end-of-net-neutrality-will-change-the-internet/
  6. Hathaway, Jesse. “Ending Net Neutrality Will Save the Internet, Not Destroy It.” Fox News, FOX News Network, www.foxnews.com/opinion/ending-net-neutrality-will-save-the-internet-not-destroy-it
  7. Kasana, Mehreen. “Here’s How Repealing Net Neutrality Could Change The Way You Use The Internet.” Bustle, Bustle, 13 Nov. 2018, www.bustle.com/p/how-does-net-neutrality-affect-you-your-internet-habits-could-change-dramatically-7542713
  8. Curtis, Joe. “The pros and cons of net neutrality.” (1970, July 31). Retrieved November 29, 2018, from https://www.itpro.co.uk/strategy/28115/the-pros-and-cons-of-net-neutrality
  9. Ramirez, M. (n.d.). Pros And Cons Of Net Neutrality. Retrieved November 30, 2018, from https://www.hercampus.com/school/regent/pros-and-cons-net-neutrality
  10. Tylt, The. “Is the Death of Net Neutrality Actually Good for the Internet?” The Tylt, thetylt.com/politics/net-neutrality-end-good-for-internet

 

Figure 1: Khanna, Ro. “In Portugal, with no net neutrality, internet providers are starting to split the net into packages. Pic.twitter.com/.” Twitter, Twitter, 21 Nov. 2017,  https://twitter.com/RoKhanna/status/923701871092441088/photo/1?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E923701871092441088&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.bustle.com%2Fp%2Fhow-does-net-neutrality-affect-you-your-internet-habits-could-change-dramatically-7542713

Figure 2: Khanna, Ro. “The FCC Is Getting Ready to Overturn #NetNeutrality. If They Succeed, ISPs Will Be Able to Split the Net into Packages. This Means That You Will No Longer Be Able to Pay One Price to Access Any Site You Want. Pic.twitter.com/VEkNxPmVlu.” Twitter, Twitter, 21 Nov. 2017, https://twitter.com/RoKhanna/status/933016966071234560?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E933016966071234560&ref_url=http%3A%2F%2Ffortune.com%2F2017%2F11%2F21%2Fwhat-net-neutrality-means-for-you%2F

Rebuttal Rewrite – D2Forsaken

On the other hand, people argue that Net Neutrality is a bad thing and that internet should go back to to its original policies. They that the internet was fine until Net Neutrality was introduced in 2015. The question why it would be a bad idea to go back to the old way. Before Net Neutrality, consumers could pick and choose what they want instead of paying a big sum certain applications and cites that they did not need nor want. Arguing that some people would only use video and e-mail, so why must they pay for things that they are never going to use like games. Jesse Hathaway, author of “Ending Net Neutrality Will Save the Internet, Not Destroy It,” stated, “No internet service provider wants to be known for having ‘slow service’ or being ‘anti-free-speech,’ so there’s nothing for consumers to worry about.” Since the Internet Service Providers want more consumers to use their internet, “slow service” would cause their reputation to be tarnished. Influencing their previously loyal customer to find go out and find other internet providers. So in the end, the absence of Net Neutrality would force the Internet Service Providers to the consider the benefits of their consumers more as a priority. Charging people more or having more consumers? The answer for them would be pretty clear, critics of Net Neutrality claim, more customers would better their reputation and in turn gain their more customers. Allowing their company to make the most money possible. This would then cause a chain of events of people “flocking” to the Internet Service Provider who does not have “slow-lanes”.

The Tylt, the company authored the article “Is the Death of Net Neutrality Actually Good for the Internet,”  wrote, “Internet service providers (ISPs) will now compete against each other, leading to better services and products for the consumer. Prices might actually go down.” Although this point could possibly be absolutely true, why risk our economy on probability. Yes, in theory Internet Service Providers would try to make their internet the best in order to attract more people into using their internet. This in turn would result in more competition and prices would have to go down because everyone likes good rates at a cheap price. However, there is no strict regulations on these businesses to ensure that this would be the outcome if Net Neutrality were to be revoked.

With Net Neutrality, people are able to post inappropriate things that others don’t want to see. Without Net Neutrality we can deny people from doing that and make sure the internet is a safe place. With Net Neutrality you can restrict websites yourself but some are able to find ways to bypass that. But without Net Neutrality we could deny people who are underage from accessing certain websites without a verification of who they are first. While blocking sites like those it is possible to crack down on  peer-to-peer file-sharing and make illegal downloads nearly impossible. People could also pay for only what they want and not extra things that are a waste of money. If people only want the internet and not cable, they could choose that on their plans. Instead of paying for two and only using one service, you could pay for just one service and be aloud to use that service. Also if you don’t use the internet a lot you could pay so you could only get it on the days/weeks you need it the most. Without Net Neutrality prices, overall carrier prices would go down for those who don’t need access to everything and for those who don’t need the fastest speed. Not only that, it could also cause for less companies to pop up on the internet besides the “big” companies. Because Net Neutrality gives everyone an equal ISP causing equal customers so no one company can own the internet.” Net neutrality hurts ISPs because they pay to manage their buildings and offices, bringing them less profit,” says Monica Ramirez author of “Pros And Cons Of Net Neutrality.” With Net Neutrality giving companies equal benefits, and not charging us the consumer it’s forced to charge companies like Netflix. Charging Netflix more to be on their provider than makes us the consumer pay even more money a month to access it.

References:

  1. Hathaway, Jesse. “Ending Net Neutrality Will Save the Internet, Not Destroy It.” Fox News, FOX News Network, www.foxnews.com/opinion/ending-net-neutrality-will-save-the-internet-not-destroy-it
  2. Curtis, Joe. “The pros and cons of net neutrality.” (1970, July 31). Retrieved November 29, 2018, from https://www.itpro.co.uk/strategy/28115/the-pros-and-cons-of-net-neutrality
  3. Donnelly, G. (n.d.). What Net Neutrality Means for You and Your Time Online. Retrieved November 29, 2018, from http://fortune.com/2017/11/21/what-net-neutrality-means-for-you/
  4. Ramirez, M. (n.d.). Pros And Cons Of Net Neutrality. Retrieved November 30, 2018, from https://www.hercampus.com/school/regent/pros-and-cons-net-neutrality

Bibliography – D2Forsaken

Blumenthal, Paul. “What Net Neutrality Really Means For You (And For Us).” The Huffington Post, TheHuffingtonPost.com, 26 Dec. 2017, www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/net-neutrality-good-bad_us_5a396d07e4b0860bf4ab9e6f.

Background: Without Net Neutrality, internet providers cause force us to use their favorite social media and other cites similar. They can block all websites that they don’t agree with forcing people to use the internet provider’s preferred cites. They forced consumers into these “walled gardens” as described in the article since we are not aloud to choose what our preferred website is.
How I plan to use it: I plan to use this article to help show the affects of no Net Neutrality. It forces people to stick with one or two sources that the provider has “selected” for them.

Collins, Keith. “Net Neutrality Has Officially Been Repealed. Here’s How That Could Affect You.” The New York Times, The New York Times, 11 June 2018, www.nytimes.com/2018/06/11/technology/net-neutrality-repeal.html

Background: When Net Neutrality was first put into place it, they got rid of some rules that were put into place before it. One of those being that companies can not block websites or apps that they do not like. Another one being they are not aloud to throttle service speeds, there for everyone has equal internet speed when looking up information. Finally they cannot prioritize the people who pay more to make their internet speeds faster, therefore the poor and rich have equal speed.
How I plan to use it: I plan to use it to show how without Net Neutrality, companies will run the internet we use. They will abuse their powers and make everyone suffer but using what they want to use and pay more for better internet.

Donnelly, G. (n.d.). What Net Neutrality Means for You and Your Time Online. Retrieved November 29, 2018, from http://fortune.com/2017/11/21/what-net-neutrality-means-for-you/

Background: The countries that do not have Net Neutrality such as South Korea, China, Japan and many more suffer because of it. Without Net Neutrality, Internet Providers are able to make you pay for each individual thing you want to do. Meaning if you want video, e-mail, gaming, and social media you have to pay each separately causing it to be more expensive. Where as with Net Neutrality you could pay everything together in one sum.
How I plan to use it: I plan to use this to help enforce the fact that without Net Neutrality, not everyone could afford to pay things separately. Bundles with Net Neutrality help reduce prices so they are much more affordable to everyone.

Finley, Klint. “FCC Plan to Kill Net Neutrality Rules Could Hurt Students.” Wired, Conde Nast, 12 Dec. 2017, www.wired.com/story/fcc-plan-to-kill-net-neutrality-rules-could-hurt-students/.

Background: This article follows the story of a girl named Nichole Williams and how video plays a big part in her career. Video is her way of education with a one-on-one mentors and with Net Neutrality around she is able to do that. Without Net Neutrality it would be ruined because it would be more expensive and internet providers would throttle her fast lane because she doesn’t have the money to spend it on things like that.
How I plan to use it: I plan to use this to show a real life example on how Net Neutrality allows people to connect with others online. Without it many peoples’ lives will fall apart such as Nichole Williams.

Finley, Klint. “Here’s How the End of Net Neutrality Will Change the Internet.” Wired, Conde Nast, 6 Mar. 2018, www.wired.com/story/heres-how-the-end-of-net-neutrality-will-change-the-internet/.

Background: The fall of Net Neutrality means the fall of smaller companies. Smaller companies like Discord, even though it is very popular it is smaller than the larger companies. Therefore causing the small company such as Discord to fall and go bankrupt because it doesn’t have the funds to pay for things such as throttled internet speeds and fast lanes. Though some major comapnies such as Comcast claim they will not throttle speeds or block websites as long as they are lawful.
How I plan to use it: To show how smaller companies will die out even though they are more popular than these much larger money giants. With small companies falling, it causes the bigger companies to become even bigger therefor less and less companies to compete against.

Hathaway, Jesse. “Ending Net Neutrality Will Save the Internet, Not Destroy It.” Fox News, FOX News Network, www.foxnews.com/opinion/ending-net-neutrality-will-save-the-internet-not-destroy-it.

Background: Service providers are actually on our sides and say they don’t want to known for having “slow service” or being “anti-free-speech.” The internet was fine up until 2015 when they first introduced Net Neutrality, so now why of a sudden is it a bad thing that people want to go back. Net Neutrality was made to give more power to the federal government over the internet.
How I plan to use it: I plan to use this article to help with my rebuttal argument showing that some companies are not going to do what people say they are. They are not going to ruin the internet experience for you and it makes you think about who is telling the truth about Net Neutrality.

Kasana, Mehreen. “Here’s How Repealing Net Neutrality Could Change The Way You Use The Internet.” Bustle, Bustle, 13 Nov. 2018, www.bustle.com/p/how-does-net-neutrality-affect-you-your-internet-habits-could-change-dramatically-7542713.

Background: Repealing Net Neutrality causes companies to become money hungry. Making people pay for better internet speed and not bundling up packages making things more expensive. With Net Neutrality, it allows user to connect and communicate feely for the most part with limitations or inhibitions. If it was repealed people would buy things based on their needs but for someone who needs to use all of them such as teachers and journalists. The prices become very expensive that most would not be able to afford.
How I plan to use it: I plan to use it to show how jobs would suffer without Net Neutrality since some jobs require all the packages. With that, there would be less creativity on the internet because people have to pick and choose what they want.

Curtis, Joe. “The pros and cons of net neutrality.” (1970, July 31). Retrieved November 29, 2018, from https://www.itpro.co.uk/strategy/28115/the-pros-and-cons-of-net-neutrality

Background:  Net Neutrality helps the internet and it can also hurt the internet at the same time. With it people are aloud to express themselves without any worries. Without Net Neutrality, the website you were gonna post on could possibly be blocked by your internet provider. With Net Neutrality also comes to the negative side of things like internet providers not being able to block age-sensitive sites. While there are ways for parents to restrict them, children always find a way around them.
How I plan to use it: I plan to use both sides of the argument with this article, the pros and cons of Net Neutrality.. Net Neutrality is good in some areas such as not being able to block sites but they’re also not aloud to block age-sensitive sites that some people shouldn’t be aloud to access.

Ramirez, M. (n.d.). Pros And Cons Of Net Neutrality. Retrieved November 30, 2018, from https://www.hercampus.com/school/regent/pros-and-cons-net-neutrality

Background: For every pro of Net Neutrality, there is a con to go with it. Not everything is perfect and Net Neutrality is one of those things that have many holes in it’s system that some people don’t see. Things such as that it is bad for the Internet Provider to give things to cheaper then they want because it forces them to make less profit.
How I plan to use it: I plan to use it to help with my Rebuttal and to show that Net Neutrality no matter how perfect we think it is, still has some flaws in its plan.

Tylt, The. “Is the Death of Net Neutrality Actually Good for the Internet?” The Tylt, thetylt.com/politics/net-neutrality-end-good-for-internet.

Background: Ajit Pai is one of the main people who want to repeal Net Neutrality saying he supports free and open internet. He says that getting rid of it would actually “…protect consumers and promote better, faster internet access and more competition.” Pay goes on to say that Net Neutrality actually hurts smaller companies and if it was repealed would actually create more competition and allow for more choices for the consumer.
How I plan to use it: To assist in my Rebuttal argument to show that if Net Neutrality was repealed it would actually help. To show how smaller companies will grow and become in the talks as “best service provider” and consumers would have more providers to choose from.

Grammar Exercise – D2Forsaken

If a primary caretaker has a negative attitude toward their own child, it increases the risk that the child will grow up hostile towards others. And its not just aggression toward others that results from child abuse; a large amount of children raised by abusive parents also harm themselves. The reason for this negative behavior is because the children don’t learn appropriate techniques for handling lifes disappointments. If you aren’t raised with coping skills, you’re more likely to act ‘inappropriately’ than if you have developed more reasonable approaches. The effect of poor parenting as reported by Dr. Geoffrey Dahmer in “The Bully Papers”, is that everyone gets the child they deserve.

Visual Rewrite – D2Forsaken

Ad Council “Now”

0:01- The scene opens up to a family friendly restaurant. The point of view we get is from behind the counter looking as if we were a waiter. In the front, you can see a white man with two young children one black and one white. In the back, you can see a couple as well having dinner together at the restaurant. The man seems to be the white child’s father and with them is a friend of the child such as a teammate. The footage is grainy and the color is not true as if was a homemade movie with a cheap camera or perhaps shot on a cell phone.

0:02-0:05- The camera zooms on another white kid who was not shown in the first seconds but sitting on the opposite of the man. He has a big smile on his face appears to be laughing while his father ruffles the boy’s hair. This sets the mood to be a happy light-hearted environment.  Suddenly the white boy face changes from happy smiling to concerned straight mouth as he glances over his shoulder in the direction of the couple behind him.

0:06-0:07- The camera now shifts focus to the women sitting behind the man the boy’s he is with. She has a look of concern or embarrassment on her face as she glances at the white boy and his father.

0:08-0:09- The camera now comes back to the man at the counter. He looks very uncomfortable as he eats a french fry and eventually turns around to observe the couple behind him.

0:10-0:11- The camera now zooms out and shows the man and the first white boy looking behind them at the couple. The man is using his left hand to grab onto the woman’s right wrist. The couple seems to be having a disagreement that is making the man and the children at the counter very uncomfortable.

0:12-0:16- The camera now zooms back onto the white man in front and now his face seems to look more like a face of anger. He looks left as if he is trying to think of the best thing to do in this situation. After he looks left the screen turns black and asks the question “WHEN DO YOU GET INVOLVED.” This indicates that the scene behind the man is violent and might get out of control. The camera zooms back in on the man at the counter and now he is shifting his eyes from left to right, looking down as if he doesn’t know what to do.

0:17-0:19- The camera shows a close up of an arm of a man and then the man grabbing someone’s hair. The hair is long and blonde like the woman who was in the back with her date. The screen goes black and the word “NOW?” appears. Next, we see the man with his hand on her wrist yanking her arm and making her spin around in a painful manner.

0:20-0:21- The man at the counter appears on screen once again. He is clearly angry by the pursing of his lips and the tautness of his eyes. We see the blonde women and she is upset this time. Her hair is in disarray and she is frowning and looking downward at the floor. The man with her is standing up with his back to us. He raises his right arm above his head and swings in a downward motion. The woman’s head jerks back as if the man’s hand struck her in the face.

0:22-0:30- We now zoom back into the second white boy’s face and he is really upset. He looks as if he is about to cry as if he witnessed the man struck his date. The boy is resting his chin on his fisted hand, he is frowning and his eyebrows are droopy. This sets the mood completely different than the last time we saw the young boy. He was happy hanging out with his dad having a good time. Words appear over the sad boy’s face saying “THE BEST TIME TO GET INVOLVED IS NOW.” As the words appear, the young boy seems to turn his head as if he is looking at his father to do something. Another message flashes across the screen “TEACH BOYS THAT VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN IS WRONG.”

0:31-0:37- A black screen comes on and says “Teach Early. Call 800-END-ABUSE”. This shows that the video was an ad for abuse and you can teach boys at an early age that it is not ok to hurt women. There is also the telephone number to call in case any woman are getting abused.

Enough About You- D2Forsaken

Money seems to have a big role in our society and we can’t do much or get far if we don’t have any. Money is valuable in different ways, even when they don’t see it physically. In today’s society people must have faith in the government and in the banking system that our money is being handled in the proper manner; if not, then we would have to hide all of the money under the mattress or around the house. I have no clue what happens in the banks, or how they take care of people’s money. I always thought money was simple; we either have some or we don’t—that’s it. However, being introduced to this assignment, the Yap Fei, US gold, French francs, Brazilian cruzeros, and debit accounts now seem similar. People don’t actually see your money being transferred. When we get paid, we aren’t handed cash, we don’t receive a physical check, the money’s all directly transferred to the bank, and we just have to trust that we got more money.

Rebuttal- D2Forsaken

With Net Neutrality, people are able to post inappropriate things that others don’t want to see. Without Net Neutrality we can deny people from doing that and make sure the internet is a safe place. With Net Neutrality you can restrict websites yourself but some are able to find ways to bypass that. But without Net Neutrality we could deny people who are underage from accessing certain websites without a verification of who they are first. While blocking sites like those it is possible to crack down on  peer-to-peer file-sharing and make illegal downloads nearly impossible. People could also pay for only what they want and not extra things that are a waste of money.

If people only want the internet and not cable, they could choose that on their plans. Instead of paying for two and only using one service, you could pay for just one service and be aloud to use that service. Also if you don’t use the internet a lot you could pay so you could only get it on the days/weeks you need it the most. Without Net Neutrality prices, overall carrier prices would go down for those who don’t need access to everything and for those who don’t need the fastest speed. Not only that, it could also cause for less companies to pop up on the internet besides the “big” companies.

Because Net Neutrality gives everyone an equal ISP causing equal customers so no one company can own the internet.” Net neutrality hurts ISPs because they pay to manage their buildings and offices, bringing them less profit,” says Monica Ramirez author of Pros And Cons Of Net Neutrality. With Net Neutrality giving companies equal benefits, and not charging us the consumer it’s forced to charge companies like Netflix. Charging Netflix more many to be on their provider, it makes us the consumer pay even more money a month to access it.

 

References:

Robust Verb- D2Forsaken

Vancouver has a huge problem  with heroin addicts and people would do anything to get these drugs even if that means breaking into homes and stealing in order to support them. Daily activities such as jobs, interactions, and relationships are hard to maintain because of the fact that they are using drugs. The “free heroin for addicts” program is doing everything they can to stop the addicts. The problem with this program is that it won’t help to ween these addicts off using heroin. It is only trying to save the city from rising crime rates that they’re up to, by providing the drugs. This will also keep the heroin users out of the hospital. It is pointless that the hospitals have to deal with people that want to use bad drugs or unsanitary needles and find themselves being unable to afford hospital bills and hard to cope without the drug. This program gives people free heroin in the cleanest way possible. This will in turn fix the city  but not the addiction that these people face.