Vinton G. Cerf, 4/1/12. “The Internet is Not a Human Right.”
The article by Vinton touches on the uprisings experience in the Middle East and together with North Africa in the month of June 2012. He mentions a tool that was extensively used to facilitate and enhance the demonstrations. This is so since individuals used internet to spread the uproar during the events. The massage was able to spread far and wide through the resourceful mode, Internet. Strong issues then come into play regarding the use of internet. There is definitely a high bar set for anything to be regarded as a human right. It brings out the idea of internet access being a civil right. Government will be the body to issue rules or simply guidelines on its accessibility. Internet has enable individuals to share and obtain information in a global scale level. The article winds up by describing that, the issue should be handled in respect to the civil and human rights perspective without an assumption that access is a right.
Indeed Internet access is not human right, reason being, internet is just one of the many means to improve human conditions. Technology and its providers are responsible for the upholding the civil and human rights through internet as the means. This refers us to the topic that internet access isn’t a right. In order to extensively gain from this topic, some arising questions will need to be handled.
Internet access is clearly a mode for advancing the policies that upholds the rights of freedom of speech. Does this make access to internet a right or an enabler of rights? Basic the descriptions requiring address is either the right being the communication being channeled through or is by what means the communication is channeled through. An expounded reason regarding advancing the freedom of expression in such a manner that other modes of communications are dwarfed needs to be addressed.
This paper argues that, in presence of negative goal oriented ambitions in regards to use of internet, which threatens human rights, termed not to be a right. Further presentation individuals crying foul over rights to information access, in assumption that it is a right by itself, and if negative duties are to be resulted, it then shall remain not to be a right. Then a question is deemed to arise, is Internet access a human right? And what are the outcomes that will surely render internet access as human right?.
In an editorial section in the New York Times, the ACM President Vinton G. Cerf proves his views on the issue of Internet access not being a human right. He argues that technologies can human right enabler, but not it being the human right. He views out that, it is wrong to ascertain technology as a right since, technology is mode to an end not the outcome desired. He gives an illustration of a horse. At some point in time, horses were indeed necessary for one make it in life or just making ends meet. However, this doesn’t ascertain the access to horse a human right. The only right in this case is the ability to manage to make a living. If an individual ends up formulating the horse rights status, or just any enabling technology, one shall wind up valuing wrong things.
Where does that leave things that are valuable for the capacity to exercise a human right but are not inherently instrumentally necessary for membership, such as the Internet? The reason we might make human right claims for things that we find valuable is that we find them valuable for something that is instrumentally necessary for membership. It has been shown that a number of arguments for a human right to the Internet fail, but it still might be easy for
A study can be carried out in an institution setting. For instance, a student individual requires internet access to acquire information related by the learning institution. If the individual is asked on the mode of getting relayed information to them, such questions would be asked. What mode of communication does on rely most on getting relayed information? Expected results are like, thought the institution website, flyers and notices on information boards. By this, what can be adapted is that communication can still be achieved and that it is a right from the student to get current affairs of an institution. In questioning the mode of information dispensation, it brings to no importance. Hence it remains that internet access isn’t a right.
Cerf, V. G. (2012, January 4). Internet Access Is Not a Human Right. Retrieved from New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/opinion/internet-access-is-not-a-human-right.html
Klimas, L. (2012, January 5). Founder of Internet Says ‘Internet Access Is Not a Human Right’. Retrieved from The blaze: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2012/01/05/founder-of-internet-says-internet-access-is-not-a-human-right/
Peterson, J. (2012, August 1). ‘Internet access not a human right,’ says ‘Father of the Internet’. Retrieved from The Daily Caller: http://dailycaller.com/2012/01/08/internet-access-not-a-human-right-says-father-of-the-internet/
Raz, J. (1986). The Morality of Freedom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Skepys, B. (2012). Is there a Hulan Right to the Internet? In B. Skepys, Journal of Politics and Law (p. 16). San Francisco: Canadian Center of Science and Education.
Stephen B. Wicker, S. M. (2013, June). Access to the Internet Is a Human Right. Communications of the ACM, pp. , Vol. 56 No. 6, Pages 43-46.
Winter., J. S. (2012). Global Studies Journal,. Is Internet Access a Human Right? Linking Information and Communication Technology Development with Global Human Rights’ Efforts, 35-48.