Is Internet Access a Human Right?

In summary, the question of whether or not access to the internet should be considered a human right is still up for debate. There are pros and cons to both sides of the argument. However, I would say that it is not a human right and should not be considered as such.
  • #106


croghan27 said:
This is not internet access, but regular television access - a European Court has decided that http://ca.news.yahoo.com/eu-court-says-world-cup-shown-free-tv-20110217-111923-326.html" .



It speaks of 'free TV' - I am not sure how 'free' that is, but we can take it that the decision refers to channels that do not charge for their programming in ways other than commercials. (Does this enshrine, in some way, beer commercials as some kind of right?)

On the other hand they, government(s) do exert some pressure on content ... moral considerations, and such ... I do not doubt that a program 'brought you by your neighbourhood al Qua'ida'would have a hard time making it.

The broadcasting channels belong to the people of (my) country and are administrated by the government which allots spaces for broadcasters, commercial and otherwise. So they have the ultimate hammer in this - (do what we say or we take away your license!), and I suppose it works in similar ways in the European Union. It would be interesting to see if this holds up under appeal.

Do you need special equipment to receive "pay tv"?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #107


WhoWee said:
Do you need special equipment to receive "pay TV"?

I believe you need some kind of special password to receive satellite channels and have to contract to get the cable ones. I get cable TV (football and baseball are a necessity) and have to pay (overpay, if you ask me ) for access to certain channels.

I have lived in the north and knew people that did not have electricity, a necessity to operate the set (they were trappers), and then there is the cost of the set.

This here freedom stuff is a costly business.
 
  • #108


croghan27 said:
I believe you need some kind of special password to receive satellite channels and have to contract to get the cable ones. I get cable TV (football and baseball are a necessity) and have to pay (overpay, if you ask me ) for access to certain channels.

I have lived in the north and knew people that did not have electricity, a necessity to operate the set (they were trappers), and then there is the cost of the set.

This here freedom stuff is a costly business.

I have satellite dishes and converter boxes - not sure how the signal isn't restricted?
 
  • #109


WhoWee said:
I have satellite dishes and converter boxes - not sure how the signal isn't restricted?

er...er... it IS restricted ... until you PAY for the service. Thus it is pay TV.
I do not understand the question.

As i understand it, the World Cup must be broadcast on channels who audience is not limited to those that pay this fee. (I guess? If you read the linked article you know as much as I do about the situation.)

I just connected this story with our discussion of the internet as a human right. Is the World Cup considered a human right?
 
  • #110


croghan27 said:
er...er... it IS restricted ... until you PAY for the service. Thus it is pay TV.
I do not understand the question.

As i understand it, the World Cup must be broadcast on channels who audience is not limited to those that pay this fee. (I guess? If you read the linked article you know as much as I do about the situation.)

I just connected this story with our discussion of the internet as a human right. Is the World Cup considered a human right?

Doesn't the World Cup have the right to sell their product to the highest bidder - or has it been nationalized?:smile: Do they also have to waive admission? I must be missing something?
 
  • #111


WhoWee said:
Doesn't the World Cup have the right to sell their product to the highest bidder - or has it been nationalized?:smile: Do they also have to waive admission? I must be missing something?

Take that up with the legislatures in the EU. It may have something to do with the identifiication of each club with the country where they are based. (That is just speculation.)

I know if I was a tax payer in the US cities that used tax dollars to build stadia for the team owners I would frown at the super high prices ... and being expected to pay twice for the privilege to have a team (twice, as in once through taxes and once at the gate) ... but I know not what the EU thinking was ...
 

Similar threads

Back
Top