In 2010, Finland was the first country that made the decision to make access to the Internet a human right. According to a 2010 GlobeScan study, about 4/5 people consider Internet access a fundamental right. In my opinion, access to the Internet has positive, but also negative consequences.
On the one hand I believe that the right to the internet would have a positive role, because the right to the Internet means the right to information and the right to free expression, two of the fundamental human rights. Also, citizens in areas of the world where the internet is limited or banned would no longer violate their desire to learn new things. Also, if Internet access were a guaranteed right for all citizens of the world, then some differences between people would disappear. Not only the inhabitants of the urban area would have access to the Internet, but also those from the rural areas or from isolated areas. Thus, everyone could have access to information circulating on the Internet, without any discrimination in this regard.
On the other hand, from my point of view, access in the Internet has a negative side. Thus, for some countries, for example underdeveloped countries, turning internet access into a right is not a priority. For these, priority is given to combating poverty, ensuring minimum conditions for decent living, increasing access to education, creating jobs, ending armed conflicts.
In conclusion, I believe that the right to the Internet is important, but not fundamental, which is why before a state accepts this right it should resolve its responsibilities.

Last edited by blackberries (2019-12-12 08:22:02)