This week I’ve been attending the Personal Democracy Forum, a conference geared toward how technology and the Internet are changing democracy in America. Since I’m a person that uses advances in technology (social media in particular) to speak out for political causes, this conference has been right up my alley.
One very interesting topic that has come up with several speakers is the question of whether or not Internet access is a right or not. Some of the speakers made very cogent points that populations without access to information might as well live in police states. If you can’t forage information for yourself, where do you get your information?
However, I can’t see this argument being used to justify ‘free’ Internet in every home. In fact, government-sponsored Internet might actually be a detriment, especially to poor people. Government-sponsored Internet opens the door to government-controlled Internet, and I want Uncle Sam to keep his hands and his censorship to himself.
The government controls the Internet in places like China, where they decide what kind of information citizens may have access to. Transparency is key for maintaining a government by the people, and without the ability to find dissenting information about public policy, what stops lawmakers from doing whatever the heck they like all while telling us they’re acting in our best interest?
Aside from the whole potential government control thing, it’s just a bad idea to put free Internet in homes with kids that likely spend a lot of time outside of parental supervision. Think about it: Poor kids most likely come from single parent families, or families where both parents work to try to make ends meet. These kids don’t have nannies or fancy afterschool programs -- they are latchkey kids.
Studies have shown that kids from poor families with Internet access spend much more time goofing off than their peers from more well off families. Researchers believe that this is due to the inability of parents to monitor their kids’ use of the technology. It’s become such a widespread concern that the FCC is considering spending $200 million to create a “digital literacy corps” of trainers to go into schools and libraries to teach parents and students productive uses of computers.
When you pay for something, you have an investment in it. Parents that decide to bring the Internet into their home will take the time to teach their kids about responsible usage, and will keep a closer eye on their online shenanigans. After all, why spend money on something that doesn’t improve your family’s life?
The Internet is a tangible product – something created, maintained, and delivered by actual people. Internet Service Providers connect our personal computers to an increasingly endless stream of content and information provided by other people. Internet service shouldn’t be ‘free’ any more than cable or phone lines should be free. Just because you have a right to something doesn’t mean you have a right to someone else paying for it.
Image via kodomut/Flickr
This Hot Dad Wants to Do Your Ironing
KStew Refuses to Shower
This Hot Dad Wants to Cook You Dinner
This Hot Dad Cooks AND Does the Dishes
Comments 21
whose parents let them run free? I am a single parent and I am considered poor but I know more about what my kid does than any of my friends with nannies. I agree with very little of what you say, but I respect your right to say it. I would however suggest that you come down from your ivory tower every now and then and stop being so judgemental to those who don't live your lifestyle.
Exactly. We all have the right, and the freedom to buy whatever extras we can afford, nothing more. The internet, is definately an "extra".
Internet is available at libraries everywhere. Anyone who wants to use it can get off their duff and go to the public library. I am so tired of Uncle Sam (aka hard working Americans) providing so much for people who don't want to work. I know that there are many who are unemployed because of the economy. My heart bleeds for them and they are not the ones I am addressing. I am addressing the people who make a life of being a welfare recepient. I am so tired of hearing about receiving "Obama money." It is not "Obama's money." It is OUR money. Nancy Pelosi's daughter just made a video where she interviewed people at a welfare office. Some didn't work because they didn't need to! The government was providing everything they needed. And of course the famous line "Obama's money" was repeated several times. When my family was struggling we didn't have cell phones because we couldn't afford them. We didn't have cable (for the same reason.) We didn't eat out. We had dial-up internet. We learned from this experience and appreciate what we have now. We are taking this away from people when we supply a way-of-life for them. We are encouraging poverty and entitlements.
Absolutely NOT. What don't people understand about NOTHING is free??? SOMEONE has to pay for it.
No, it isn't.
it's not a right. It's a service you pay for. And if you can't afford it you can use it at the local public library. The tax dollars that go to the public library giving that use is as much as needs be done.
On "free" cell phones provided by the government:
"Last year, a federal program paid out $1.6 billion to cover free cell phones and the monthly bills of 12.5 million wireless accounts. The program, overseen by the FCC and intended to help low-income Americans, is popular for obvious reasons, with participation rising steeply since 2008, when the government paid $772 million for phones and monthly bills. But observers complain that the program suffers from poor oversight, in which phones go to people who don’t qualify, and hundreds of thousands of those who do qualify have more than one phone."