Discussion 4 MIS
8 T E A C H E R L I B R A R I A N 4 5 : 4
HELEN R. ADAMS AND CHRISTOPHER HARRIS
“Without Net Neutrality,
curriculum decisions may be
influenced by ISPs.”
Net Neutrality is the concept that Inter-net service providers (ISP) must treat all Internet content equally “regardless of its kind, source, or destination” (Merriam-Web- ster, n.d.). Under Net Neutrality, ISPs were not allowed to speed up, slow down, favor, or block Internet traffi c. Net Neutrality protections were created in 2015 by the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC), an independent government agency that oversees and en-
forces communications laws and regulations for state, national, and international
communications via radio, television, cable, wire, and satellite (FCC, n.d). Under
its 2015 “Open Internet Order,” the FCC changed the classifi cation of ISPs from
“information services” to “telecommunication services.” With that change, In-
ternet service providers became “common carriers,” public utilities like phone
companies that cannot charge different rates for carrying the same content. The
“Open Internet Order” prevented the creation of “slow lanes” and “fast lanes”
for Internet traffi c. This reclassifi cation occurred because, under a lawsuit brought
by Verizon in 2014, a federal court struck down the ability of the FCC to impose
Net Neutrality aspects of antiblocking and antislowing on information services
(McArdle, 2015).
revokinG net neutrality
Never a fan of Net Neutrality, FCC chairman Ajit Pai, designated chair of the
commission by President Trump in January 2017, signaled early in his term his
intent to dismantle Net Neutrality protections. In May 2017, the FCC issued “Re-
storing Internet Freedom Notice of Proposed Rulemaking.” Its purpose was to
“restore the Internet to a light-touch
regulatory framework” and to change
broadband Internet service back to an
“information service” (FCC, 2017).
The news that the FCC intended to
reverse Net Neutrality created huge re-
actions by advocates who wanted Inter-
net activity to continue with all infor-
mation, content, websites, and services
treated equally. The FCC received 21.8
million comments, most protesting the
rule change, but a controversy over
millions of duplicate messages sent by
spambots caused Ajit Pai to announce
that the FCC would consider only
those that “introduced new facts into
the record or made serious legal argu-
ments” (Romano, 2017). In addition to
comments, there were protests against
the impending FCC action. On July
12, 2017, the American Library Asso-
ciation (ALA) and nearly two hundred
other organizations participated in
“Day of Action,” an online protest to
save Net Neutrality (ALA, 2017).
On December 14, 2017, FCC com-
missioners revoked Network Neutral-
ity rules by a 3–2 vote. As a result, ISPs
can now legally offer “tiered service”
favoring some websites, services, and
applications with faster connections,
blocking others, or charging some con-
Net Neutrality Why It Matters to School Librarians
F e a t u r e A R T I C L E
tent providers greater fees to connect
to their customers (Fung, 2017). This
is the “fast lane” and “slow lane” con-
cept. Under the new FCC order, ISPs
are required to reveal their service pro-
visions to customers, but transparency
does not mean equitable access. Trans-
parency is only feasible when there is
a viable marketplace where customers
such as schools can select service from
a company that better refl ects their
needs. A deeper issue that consumers
face, however, is the nebulous nature
of the Internet. Even if a consumer’s
direct ISP is not fi ltering traffi c, other
steps in the connection between the
consumer and the content being ac-
cessed may cause a problem.
Regardless of the vote, this issue is
not over. Political discourse, legal ac-
tion, and active advocacy will continue.
The FCC’s actions are expected to trig-
ger legal challenges. On the day of the
vote, the New York State Offi ce of the
Attorney General (2017) announced
that it will spearhead a multistate law-
suit to fi ght the elimination of Net
Neutrality rules.
ALA and other advocates will con-
tinue to work toward restoration of
Net Neutrality. ALA president Jim
Neal asserts,
Teachers, librarians and students
in K–12 schools have benefi ted enor-
mously from effective and equitable
access to Internet resources, appli-
cations, educational materials, and
communities of learning. The dis-
mantling of Net Neutrality places
this educational innovation at risk,
as the speed and quality of access is
eroded, and all ideas and perspec-
tives are not treated equally. (per-
sonal communication, December
28, 2017)
potential consequences For schools
Although there is considerable specu-
lation, the full impact of the end of
Net Neutrality for schools and school
libraries is unknown at this time and
may remain so for many months. Rob-
ert Bocher, senior fellow for ALA’s Of-
fi ce for Information Technology Policy,
notes that broadband providers and
ISPs can now legally make decisions
regarding the content that is carried
on their networks related to its speed
and cost (personal communication,
December 31, 2017). This changes the
role of both a school and library’s ISPs
and all of the interconnected networks
from being neutral carriers of content
to potentially being gatekeepers of
content. This change could be direct—
slowing down or even blocking content
based on provider or topic—or more
indirect—with information content
providers charging schools and librar-
ies to recoup costs imposed by their
ISP or other network providers.
Marijke Visser, associate director
for the Offi ce for Information Tech-
nology Policy at the ALA Washington
offi ce, provided some insight into the
effect for schools. A major concern is
whether educational content will be
slowed down so ISPs can give preferen-
tial treatment in a “fast lane” to content
that will give them greater fi nancial re-
turn or in which they have ownership.
Visser expressed special concern for
rural areas, explaining,
If provider X starts throttling
[slowing] content for a school, then
the school would have no other op-
tion but to move its business to an-
other ISP that would not throttle
school-based content (or content it
teen issues Balinson, Andrea. depression, anxiety and bipolar disorders (Living with Diseases and Disorders). Mason Crest, 2018. 64p. LB $31.93. ISBN: 9781422237557. Grades 7-12. With a brief glossary preceding each chapter, the reader understands the vocabulary. Back matter has some valuable information including a Q-code video to show students how to help friends with depression. The section “What to Say and What Not to Say” is powerful. Additional reading, extensive glossary, and index are included.
Goldy-Brown, Sarah. autism spectrum disorder (Diseases and Disorders). Lucent Greenhaven, 2018. 104p. LB $39.90. ISBN: 978153456122-9. Grades 7-10. The broad range of Autism manifests itself in many ways. Understanding the range helps the person as well as friends and family. Each chapter discusses the causes, treatments, and the features of autism. Fact boxes condense facts for a quicker read. Chapter notes, glossary, further information, and index conclude this rich title.
Haelle, Tara. vaccination investigation: the history and science of vaccines. Twenty-First Century, 2018. 120p. LB $37.32.ISBN: 97-1512425307. Grades 8-12. Beginning chapters cover the history of vaccines, and the author also presents a chapter, “Pushback against Vaccines,” which is useful for research including cultural understanding of why some people choose not to get vaccines. Very informative fact boxes are included. Extensive back matter will serve the research student.
Orr, Tamra B. coping with breakups and Jealousy (Coping). RosenYA, 2018. 112p. LB $27.85. ISBN: 9781508173885.Grades 7-12. This series deals with current social issues that teens are concerned with such as cyberbullying, gender dysphoria, racial inequality and more. Well-developed fact boxes and charts assist teens in handling these issues. A glossary, in-depth bibliography, and index conclude this title.
bookmarkIT s a r a c a t h e r i n e h o W a r d
ya nonFiction
A P R I L 2 0 1 8 9
dismantling Net Neutrality rules will
affect schools. He posed the question,
“Will school districts be stuck with the
bill for higher transport costs levied
on digital content providers?” (CoSN,
2017). He was concerned that, under
the new FCC order, requiring ISPs to
disclose their pricing and practices
does nothing to protect schools from
higher carriage fees charged by ISPs to
licensed educational content providers,
such as reference databases, and then
passed along to schools (personal com-
munication, December 16, 2017). In
other words, even if the school’s direct
service provider is completely transpar-
ent about not charging the school, any
other provider in the chain between the
school and the content provider could
be imposing fees that result in a higher
cost to the school.
Scott Floyd, chief technology officer
for White Oak ISD in Texas, articulates
the uncertainty for districts like his,
The ISPs will have the power to
decide who they allow full access
and who they do not. Sadly, it will
all revolve around who is paying for
the extra usage and who isn’t. Does
that mean Google tools like Hangout
or Microsoft’s Skype will be slowed?
Only time will tell, but there will be
no rules in place protecting those
tools and keeping the bandwidth
constant for everyone. In the end,
the dollar makes the decision. (per-
sonal communication, December 4,
2017)
possible solutions
Solutions for schools facing a future
without Net Neutrality are not plen-
tiful and favor those with strength in
numbers of districts, large and small,
banding together into groups to cre-
ate leverage. Krueger sees regional or
statewide educational networking con-
sortia as one potential solution:
Those schools and libraries that
are from larger organizations and/
or can aggregate their purchasing
power through cooperative purchas-
ing are likely to be best protected in
this new world. State education net-
works, RENs, and state contracts
are all likely to be able to better
protect rural schools and libraries.
(personal communication, Decem-
ber 16, 2017)
He recommends that those with
market choices work toward contracts
that “prohibit blocking, throttling, and
paid prioritization—in other words,
embedding Net Neutrality in their
contracts.”
In rural regions, municipal broad-
band may be a strong possibility, but
the same companies that fought hard
to kill Net Neutrality are also trying to
block this potential solution. Currently
there are battles in many state legisla-
tures to prevent the creation of mu-
nicipal broadband providers that offer
competition to established ISPs, and
more than 20 states ban or limit mu-
nicipal broadband networks (Chang,
2016). School districts, especially
smaller or rural districts, may need to
collaborate on contracts or work with
local municipalities or public libraries
to gain sufficient bargaining power to
dictate favorable terms.
net neutrality and intellectual Freedom
With Net Neutrality eliminated, In-
ternet users in K–12 schools face an
10 T E A C H E R L I B R A R I A N 4 5 : 4
wanted to use like some YouTube
video on chemical compounds or a
video from National Geographic on
bird migration). (personal commu-
nication, December 7, 2017)
Without Net Neutrality, curricu-
lum decisions may be influenced by
ISPs. What if ISP X signs a deal with
McGraw-Hill to make it the exclu-
sive digital textbook partner? As a re-
sult, access to other digital textbooks
could be terminated or slowed down.
Or perhaps the local ISP makes deci-
sions about which streaming video
services will work. These are curricu-
lum decisions that should be made by
the school, but because access comes
through the ISP, it can intrude upon
local decision-making.
An easy solution would be for the
school to change to an ISP that would
agree not to filter traffic. Unfortu-
nately, in many rural areas, there are
often few choices for ISPs, creating a
lack of competition. An FCC report
from June 2017 found that about 75%
of U.S. census block regions have zero
choice in terms of high speed Internet/
broadband access (Brodkin, 2017).
The FCC has claimed that market
competition will provide a check on
potential ISP abuse. “Given the ex-
tent of competition in Internet access
supply,” the FCC’s (2017) new order
states, “the protections regulating ISPs
are not necessary” (p. 144). Despite
the frequent claims of competition
throughout the document, the statis-
tics included by the FCC show that
competition is not as widespread as it
would like to claim.
Cost is also a factor. Consortium on
School Networking (CoSN) CEO Keith
Krueger alluded to costs when he asked
FCC commissioners to consider how
abridgement of their intellectual free-
dom. Under Net Neutrality, ISPs were
required to treat all Internet traffic
equitably, reflecting the principal of
nondiscrimination. Because the 2015
“Internet Open Order” was revoked
and replaced by the ironically titled
“Internet Freedom Order,” ISPs and
broadband providers can now differen-
tiate among Internet content, and their
“tiered access” systems can prioritize
digital speech for fast delivery, delay, or
blocking. As a result, the full spectrum
of diverse speech (including educa-
tional content) is curtailed for anyone
seeking to express or receive ideas.
One of the major purposes of
schools is to educate students for their
future roles as citizens or residents of
a democratic society. Students learn
information-literacy skills including
discerning between fact and opinion.
Schools provide Internet access for stu-
dents’ instruction, information seeking,
and learning. When there are barriers
to the provision of Internet service
such as blocking legal content or dra-
matically increasing the cost of access,
it affects students’ ability to access on-
line content and learn what is needed,
putting U.S. democracy at risk.
Neal saw the threat to reverse Net
Neutrality and asked the ALA Intel-
lectual Freedom Committee (IFC) to
write a position statement consider-
ing the “intellectual freedom impli-
cations of the efforts to set aside Net
Neutrality” (personal communication,
July 13, 2017). Between July 2017 and
February 2018, an IFC working group
created the statement laying out the
arguments for the ways Net Neutral-
ity is an intellectual freedom issue and
requesting comment from the library
community. In February 2018, ALA
Council approved “Network Neutral-
soccer/Futball Challen, Paul. What does a Forward do? (Soccer Smarts). PowerKids, 2018. 32p. LB $26.25. ISBN: 9781508154457. Grades 3-6. This series covers the additional positions of Defender, Goalkeeper, and Midfielder, with the Forward considered the “star.” The emphasis on respect, sportsmanship and team-play is encouraged. Included is a simple glossary, additional information, and an index.
Doeden, Matt. the World cup: soccer’s Global championship (Spectacular Sports). Lerner, 2018. 64p. LB $33.32. ISBN: 9781512427554. Grades 5-10. From Introduction to Source Notes, this title showcases important games through the years including information about some of the best world-class players. To understand the importance of soccer around the world, the author describes the culture of some of the “Heroics and Heartbreak” through the years.
Luke, Andrew. team usa (The Road to the World’s Most Popular Cup). Mason Crest, 2018. 80p. LB $24.95. ISBN: 9781422239520. Grades 5-10. Some consider soccer to be new to the United States, but the first games were played in 1884 at Rutgers University. To achieve a high level of popularity has taken many years. This title is filled with QR Codes, sidebars, colorful photos, research projects, and a brief glossary at the end of each chapter. An extensive glossary, additional reading, and full index completes the title.
Schuh, Mari. soccer (Spot). Amicus, 2018. 16p. LB $25.65. ISBN: 9781681570897. Grades PK-2. Each page has a full color picture of some aspect of soccer and helps to teach the beginning or non-reader new vocabulary inside the “spot” through a fun search. A page at the end gives the answers within a red circle.
bookmarkIT s a r a c a t h e r i n e h o W a r d
Junior nonFiction ity: An Intellectual Freedom Issue” as
an official statement of the ALA. The
full statement is available on the ALA
website (http://www.ala.org/advocacy/
intfreedom/netneutrality).
What can school librarians do?
The ALA and partner organizations
will continue to apply political pres-
sure until Net Neutrality is restored.
School librarians can play an active
role, and it begins with being well in-
formed on current political, legal, and
advocacy efforts. There are two key
information sources, and anyone may
use them. Register to receive the ALA
Washington Office’s District Dispatch,
a weekly e-newsletter with information
on library and education federal legis-
lation and updates on Net Neutrality
(http://www.districtdispatch.org/).
Subscribe to the Intellectual Freedom
News, a free weekly compilation of ar-
ticles on a range of intellectual freedom
issues including Net Neutrality on the
OIF Blog web page (http://www.oif.
ala.org/oif/) by entering your email
address. The next step is becoming
an active advocate for Net Neutrality.
Educate colleagues, students, admin-
istrators, school board members, and
parents about Net Neutrality and what
its loss means to schools and communi-
ties. Mobilize local support to respond
when needed and to contact senators
and representatives relating personal
stories of the realities of no Network
Neutrality rules.
the net in 2018
Net Neutrality is a difficult concept to
explain with esoteric policy language
from the FCC and other federal agen-
A P R I L 2 0 1 8 11
12 T E A C H E R L I B R A R I A N 4 5 : 4
cies. To make things more challenging,
the Internet didn’t appear to change on
December 14 when the FCC ended Net
Neutrality. The ramifications discussed
in this article outline the possibilities
experts are concerned may happen now
that protections are gone. The problem
will be identifying what, if anything, is
being done by ISPs behind the scenes.
This determination will likely require
the collection of data over time to pro-
vide evidence of slowdowns for some
content or in some locations. Indi-
viduals can help by participating in
independent speed tests like those con-
ducted by Measurement Lab at http://
measurementlab.net.
reFerences
American Library Association (ALA).
(2017). July 12 day of action to save
Net Neutrality. Retrieved from http://
www.ala.org/advocacy/july-12-day-
action-save-net-neutrality/
Brodkin, J. (2017). 50 million US
homes have only one 25Mbps Internet
provider or none at all. Retrieved from
https://arstechnica.com/information-
technology/2017/06/50-million-us-
homes-have-only-one-25mbps-inter-
net-provider-or-none-at-all/
Chang, R. (2016). Laws prohibit or re-
strict municipal broadband networks in
20-plus states. Retrieved from https://
thejournal.com/articles/2016/09/08/
laws-prohibit-or-restrict-local-gov-
ernments-from-building-broadband-
networks.aspx/
Consortium on School Networking
(CoSN). (2017). CoSN: Aggressive
Net Neutrality plan raises questions for
schools. Retrieved from http://cosn.
org/about/news/cosn-aggressive-net-
neutrality-plan-raises-troubling-ques-
tions-schools/
Federal Communications Commis-
sion (FCC). (n.d.). About the FCC.
Retrieved from https://www.fcc.gov/
about/overview/
Federal Communications Commis-
sion (FCC). (2017). Restoring Internet
freedom notice of proposed rulemaking.
Retrieved from https://www.fcc.gov/
document/restoring-internet-free-
dom-notice-proposed-rulemaking/
Fung, B. (2017). The FCC just voted
to repeal its Net Neutrality rules, in a
sweeping act of deregulation. Retrieved
from https://www.washingtonpost.
com/news/the-switch/wp/2017/12/14/
the-fcc-is-expected-to-repeal-its-
n e t - n e u t r a l i t y - r u l e s - t o d ay - i n - a -
sweeping-act-of-deregulation/?utm_
term=.7c140e19d5a6/
McArdle, J. (2015). Internet providers
are now common carriers: What does that
mean for you? Retrieved from https://
p o t o m a c i n s t i t u t e c e o . wo rd p r e s s .
com/2015/04/03/internet-providers-
a re - n ow - c o m m o n - c a r r i e rs - wh a t -
does-that-mean-for-you/
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.) Net Neutral-
ity. Retrieved from https://www.mer-
riam-webster.com/dictionary/net%20
neutrality/.
New York State Office of the Attorney
General. (2017). Press release: A. G.
Schneiderman: I will sue to stop the ille-
gal rollback of Net Neutrality. Retrieved
from https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/
ag-schneiderman-i-will-sue-stop-ille-
gal-rollback-net-neutrality/
Romano, A. (2017). The FCC asked
for Net Neutrality opinions, then re-
jected most of them. Retrieved from
h t t p s : / / w w w. v o x . c o m / t e c h n o l -
ogy/2017/12/1/16715274/fcc-net-neu-
trality-spambots-comments-pew/.
Helen R. Adams, MLS, is an online
senior lecturer for Antioch University–
Seattle in the areas of intellectual free-
dom, privacy, ethics, and copyright.
A Wisconsin resident, she formerly
worked as a school librarian and served
as president of the American Associa-
tion of School Librarians (AASL). She
is chair of the American Library As-
sociation Intellectual Freedom Com-
mittee and a member of the AASL
Knowledge Quest Advisory Board. She
authored Protecting Intellectual Free-
dom and Privacy in Your School Library
(2013) and co-contributed a chapter on
intellectual freedom to the second edi-
tion of The Many Faces of School Li-
brary Leadership (2017).
Christopher Harris is the director
of the School Library System for the
Genesee Valley Educational Partner-
ship, serving 22 small, rural school
districts in western New York. He also
serves as a fellow for Youth and Tech-
nology Policy Issues with the American
Library Association Office for Infor-
mation Technology Policy. He is the au-
thor of the Teaching Through Games
series (2015) and the activities for the
Spotlight on Kids Can Code interactive
ebooks (2016). He can be reached at
chris@playplaylearn.com.
Copyright of Teacher Librarian is the property of EL Kurdyla Publishing LLC and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.