I do not think the U.S. government should be getting involved in media regulation because the very act of media regulation goes against our right to free speech. Plenty of people both good and bad have and deserve access to the Internet, and it’s impossible to determine what exactly is “hurtful” of national security interests.
The difficulty in allowing restriction of the Internet is that once an entity has the power of control, it will become increasingly difficult to manage their ability and choice to regulate beyond what is only absolutely necessary and relevant. With the greedy nature of politicians and lobbyists today, restriction would quickly become just another tool in the government’s arsenal of ways to skew our mind, perception, and vote in their favor. I think it’s a challenge to determine who and what group of individuals is given the power to execute such a strong authority.
If the government chose not to listen and began blocking material – on the positive side, our Internet would certainly become a cleaner, friendlier place with a more positive outlook on the United States. However on the negative side, the government could be hiding the truth from us, people with peaceful albeit differing viewpoints could be silenced without just cause, and the reliability of information could become questionable.
If the government took my position and maintained net neutrality, the Internet would continue to mimic the harsh but true reality that our real life looks like every day. By simply blocking Internet pages, the government wont be able to completely stop groups and persons that intend to harm the United States. But they will make a lot of people even more infuriated with the U.S. government. The Internet is a tool that is of equal importance and value to every person that chooses to utilize it, and the government should know its people would never stand for a regulated, restricted Internet space.