QOTD: Is Internet Access a Fundamental Right?
By - Source: Tom's Hardware US
|
123 comments
Is Internet access a luxury or a necessity?
In October of last year, Finland became the first country to make broadband a legal right. Come July, every person in Finland will have the right to a one-megabit broadband connection and the Finnish Ministry of Transport and Communications has guaranteed that by 2015, this will be upped to a 100-megabit connection.
Today a new survey shows that 80 percent of people believe that Internet access is a fundamental right. BBC News today reports that a survey of more than 27,000 adults across 26 countries shows that four out of five people believe that Internet should be a basic right.
Today's question of the day is: do you think Internet access should be a fundamental right?
Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

I'd much rather my country give us free water. Water should be a right. Electricity would also be nice, but that's asking a lot.
However, for low income families there should be a low-speed discount/coupon. As contradictory as this may sound, I think that children need to grow up somewhat exposed to the internet\computer, or their chances of adapting to non-blue collar job are slim.
However, for low income families there should be a low-speed discount/coupon. As contradictory as this may sound, I think that children need to grow up somewhat exposed to the internet\computer, or their chances of adapting to non-blue collar job are slim.
I'd much rather my country give us free water. Water should be a right. Electricity would also be nice, but that's asking a lot.
However, on the other side of things, the ability to have internet at home within reasonable costs if you can afford it *should* be ensured. Fundamental right maybe not but in a modern country run with taxpayers money, it should be ensured that where you live doesn't determine whether you can get internet or not - i.e. rural places should maybe have caps on how much they need to pay to have internet installed. For example, if you're a farmer living in the countryside then you shouldn't have to pay more than say $1000 to have a line installed rather than the 10s of thousands that such people can be charged.
What does this "right" entail? Right to in-home access? If so, who's going to implement a program so that the "right" means something, and who's going to pay for it? Or is it a more general right to access - for example, by using public terminals or libraries? And what does it mean to even *have* a "right" to internet access? Does it mean a right to purchase access, or does it mean a right to have it provided?
It's a nice thought, a right to internet access - effectively, a right to information and communication - but it starts looking a lot less appealing to me when you start thinking about implementation, oversight, and a vastly higher degree of government involvement in what has, historically, been a largely private industry. Obviously government oversight has been increasing as the internet has become a greater part of our daily lives, but it would skyrocket in the event that it was characterized as a "fundamental right." But let's be realistic - that's happening anyway, whether it's a right or not.
A requirement for many people? Yes
I think it should not be a fundamental right because our lives should not revolve around computers and the internet. But if it were taken away now I think you would see a massive drop in the worlds population...
Next we're going to be debating whether or not McDonalds is a right.
The questions should be:
"Should the access to information be a fundamental right?" or should information be free?
What about television? The availability of radio and tv as portals to the outside world were free. The hardware was the only cost. Why is this no different, as far as free information access goes? Why didn't the radio broadcasters get told to just broadcast freely at libraries?
On the other side, what about electricity? We can't conduct life without, is that a basic fundamental right? One might suggest it is more than information.
This is a deep topic. love it. :-)
IF I was to say it wasn't, then the Government or a Private Organization could assume control and deny access based on race, color, religion, iq, gender or any other number of arbitrary discriminations.
So yes, I would say Internet Access is a fundamental right.
Is Internet access a luxury or a necessity?
Necessary for what? Life, business, education, to pay a bill, what?
Necessity for X, if you don't give me X I can't answer the question.