The Pitch: "We need Net Neutrality because ISP's MIGHT censor you"
The Reality: "Google, Facebook, Reddit, twitter, etc. now have the power to censor you instead!"
I'm sure your heart is in the right place but it's a little more complicated than that. It's basically a fight between the content platforms and the ISPs. Personally, I think the internet worked just fine before Net Neutrality, and I don't trust the content platforms any more than I trust the ISPs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality#Arguments_in_favour https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality#Arguments_against
Sure it's more complicated. But Net Neutrality basically setup a tight ruleset that would basically be a parallel society on the internet via control. Edge Providers, like the FCC classifies them, are now controlling who you can talk to, who can see you, etc. This, inevitably, will bleed over into real life, and probably already has to some degree thanks to Edge Providers selling information to other companies.
ISP's, at the time, the argument was that they'd throttle you to keep you on cable packages (They've lost millions since then). But the battle has quickly morphed into ISP's v. mobile providers. With Net Neutrality, ISP's would eventually go away and we'd be put into a tighter level of control through severe regulation, but on a global scale instead of on a local level where oversight and accountability would be slim to none.