Advertisement

Net Neutrality from a Public Sphere Perspective

  • Francesca Musiani
  • Maria Löblich
Chapter

Abstract

The Internet impacts social communication and the public sphere, and this impact has consequences for the political shape of the communication order—therefore, for society as a whole. One important question in this regard is which regulatory framework is being developed for the Internet, and how this framework enables and at the same time restricts communication in the public sphere. Net neutrality is at the very core of this question: distribution channels can be used as a means to discriminate, control, and prevent communication. In other words, content and user behavior can be controlled through the architecture of the physical layer and the “code” layer of the Internet. The discussion on net neutrality touches fundamental values (public interest, freedom of expression, freedom of the media, and free flow of information), that communications policy authorities in liberal democracies frequently appeal to in order to legitimize their interventions in media systems. The implementation of these values, from a normative point of view, is seen as the precondition for media to create the public sphere—be it online or offline—and thus fulfill its function in society (Napoli 2001).

Keywords

Public Sphere Content Provider Internet Service Provider Network Neutrality Hate Speech 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Bendrath, R., & Mueller, M. (2011). The end of the net as we know it? Deep packet inspection and Internet governance. New Media & Society, 13, 1142–1160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461444811398031
  2. Blevins, J., & Barrow, S. L. (2009). The political economy of free speech and network neutrality: A critical analysis. Journal of Media Law & Ethics, 1(1/2), 27–48.Google Scholar
  3. Calhoun, C. (Ed.). (1992). Habermas and the public sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  4. Clark, D. (2007). Network neutrality: Words of power and 800-pound gorillas. International Journal of Communication, 1, 701–708.Google Scholar
  5. Curien, N., & Maxwell, W. (2011). La neutralité d’Internet. Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
  6. Dahlgren, P. (2005). The Internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication, 22, 147–162. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10584600590933160 Google Scholar
  7. Dahlgren, P. (1995). Television and the public sphere. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  8. Dahlgren, P. (2010). Public spheres, societal shifts and media modulations. In J. Gripsrud & L. Weibull (Eds.), Media, markets & public spheres. European media at the crossroads (pp. 17–36). Bristol: Intellect.Google Scholar
  9. Dulong de Rosnay, M. (2011). Réappropriation des données et droit à la rediffusion. Hermès, 59, 65–66.Google Scholar
  10. Elkin-Koren, N. (2006). Making technology visible: Liability of internet service providers for peer-to-peer traffic. New York University Journal of Legislation & Public Policy, 9(15), 15–76.Google Scholar
  11. Goldsmith, J., & Wu, T. (2006). Who controls the Internet? Illusions of a borderless world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action (Vol. I & II). Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  13. Habermas, J. (1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere. Boston: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  14. Hahn, R., & Litan, R. E. (2007). The myth of network neutrality and what we should do about it. International Journal of Communication, 1, 595–606.Google Scholar
  15. Herman, B. D. (2006). Opening bottlenecks: On behalf of mandated network neutrality. Federal Communications Law Journal, 59, 107–159.Google Scholar
  16. Holznagel, B. (2010). Netzneutralität als Auf gabeder Vielfaltssicherung. Kommunikation und Recht, 13, 95–100.Google Scholar
  17. Levy, S. (2012). Power House. Deep inside a Google data center. Wired, 17 October.Google Scholar
  18. Libertus, M., & Wiesner, J. (2011). Netzneutralität, offenes Internet und kommunikative Grundversorgung. Media Perspektiven, 2, 80–90.Google Scholar
  19. Lunt, P., & Livingstone, S. (2013). Media studies’ fascination with the concept of the public sphere: Critical reflections and emerging debates. Media Culture & Society, 35, 87–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0163443712464562
  20. Marsden, C. (2010). Net neutrality. Towards a co-regulatory solution. London: Bloomsbury Academic. http://dx.doi.org/10.5040/9781849662192
  21. Mueller, M., & Asghari, H. (2012). Deep packet inspection and bandwidth management: Battles over BitTorrent in Canada and the United States. Telecommunications Policy, 36, 462–475. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2012.04.003
  22. Napoli, P. (2001). Foundations of communications policy: Principles and process in the regulation of electronic media. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  23. Nunziato, D. C. (2009). Virtual freedom: Net neutrality and free speech in the Internet age. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Palfrey, J., & Rogoyski, R. (2006). The move to the middle: The enduring threat of “harmful” speech to network neutrality. Washington University Journal of Law and Policy, 21, 31–65.Google Scholar
  25. Splichal, S. (2012). Transnationalization of the public sphere and the fate of the public. New York: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  26. Ufer, F. (2010). Der Kampf um die Netzneutralität oder die Frage, warum ein Netz neutral sein muss. Kommunikation und Recht, 13, 383–389.Google Scholar
  27. Van Eijk, N. (2011). Net neutrality and audiovisual services. IRIS Plus, 5, 7–19.Google Scholar
  28. Vogelsang, I. (2010). Die Debatte um Netzneutralität und Quality of Service. In D. Klumpp, H. Kubicek, A. Roßnagel, & W. Schulz (Eds.), Netzwelt – Wege –Werte – Wandel (pp. 5–14). Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wendelin, M. (2011). Medialisierung der Öffentlichkeit. Kontinuität und Wandel einer normativen Kategorie der Moderne. Köln: Halem.Google Scholar
  30. Wu, T. (2010). The master switch: The rise and fall of information empires. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  31. Wu, T., & Yoo, C. (2007). Keeping the Internet Neutral?: Tim Wu and Christopher Yoo Debate. Federal Communications Law Journal, 59, 575–592.Google Scholar
  32. Wu, T., & Bilton, N. (2010). One on one: Tim Wu, author of ‘The Master Switch’ New York Times, 14 November. http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/one-on-one-tim-wu-author-of-the-master-switch/. Accessed 9 Aug 2015.
  33. Yoo, C. (2005). Beyond network neutrality. Harvard Journal of Law & Technology, 19, 1–77.Google Scholar
  34. Yoo, C. (2012). Network neutrality and the need for a technological turn in Internet scholarship. In M. E. Price, S. G. Verhulst, & L. Morgan (Eds.), Routledge handbook of media law (pp. 539–555). New York, Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Zittrain, J. (2008). The future of the Internet and how to stop it. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Francesca Musiani
    • 1
  • Maria Löblich
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute for Communication Sciences (CNRS/Paris-Sorbonne/UPMC)ParisFrance
  2. 2.Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität of MunichMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations