IndexBenefits of Both Internet Regulation and Net NeutralityFinal ThoughtsReferencesEnforcing net neutrality has undoubtedly brought many benefits to Internet consumers, however those who they oppose raise some valid points for consideration as well. After evaluating these points, my personal opinion on net neutrality is such that it should depend on the nature of the market and the culture of the users, but a balance should be found where net neutrality is applied to some extent so as to maximize the benefits of both points of view. I will reflect on the question of whether the Internet should be regulated. In this essay I will also present arguments that support my point of view on the topic. We say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original EssayAdvantages of Both Internet Regulation and Net NeutralityFirst, one advantage of net neutrality regulation is that a level playing field is created, particularly in the Internet service market. ISPs large and small are given the same opportunities to acquire customers because no single company can control how data is served and accessed. A single company would therefore not be able to block access, alter services or change the flow of data at will. Another benefit that can be gained from enforcing net neutrality is that users have protected free speech due to the absence of censorship. This is especially important in cultures like that of the United States, where freedom of expression is considered a basic human right and many people and activists are able to start and spread movements through the Internet. Under net neutrality, people will therefore have the right to express themselves through social media and other platforms. However, it is true that there are many advantages to having a free market in the Internet access market, despite the points mentioned above. Although the Internet is free for everyone, there are inherently some people who use the Internet more than others. Net neutrality would charge all consumers the same amount regardless of how much an individual uses, which would put those who rarely use the Internet at a disadvantage. It also disadvantages ISPs because they get little revenue from the Internet and have to pay more to run their offices and infrastructure. This loss of profit could be used to improve and modernize existing infrastructure and services. For example, as mentioned in the first question, when net neutrality was repealed, a rural ISP was able to commit a sum of money to improve its services. Currently, ISPs are prevented from charging consumers directly, forcing them to charge sites like Netflix, which causes Netflix to increase their monthly subscription fee. Final Thoughts With these views in mind, I believe that regulation of the Internet should depend on the market type as well as the nature of its users in that area. In places like the United States, where many areas have low competition or even monopolies, and given that barriers to entry into this industry are considerably high, there is little incentive to start competing companies and build infrastructure without an existing customer base . This is where the government might consider regulating the Internet to some extent to prevent abuse of dominant position., 2, 141-179.