Blog 7

A Close Reading of Sotiris Kasapis' Argument for Digital Human Rights

In the article “Internet Access is a Fundamental Right. Especially, Amidst a Pandemic,” published on 19 May 2020 by the Institute for Internet and the Just Society, Sotiris Kasapis argues - as the title suggests - that internet access should be seen as a fundamental human right. Writing in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, Kasapis highlights how the long-standing digital divide became even more visible and urgent. While the divide existed long before the pandemic, the shift to remote work, online education, and online health consults made society's dependence on digital technology inescapable - and the consequences for those without reliable internet devastating. This divide had real, everyday impacts. People without internet access were effectively cut off from basic needs like education, employment, and healthcare - raising serious questions about whether current human rights frameworks are keeping pace with reality. If accessing the internet is now essential to exercise basic rights, then denying that access amounts to denying the rights themselves. This close reading will unpack Kasapis' main claims, examine the structure of his argument, and explore the implications he draws. It will also engage critically with his conclusions, comparing them with wider academic discussions around digital inequality and internet governance.

Summary of the article

Kasapis opens his article by referencing a conversation between Salvador Allende and French journalist Régis Debray, where Allende argued that happiness should be seen as a human right, and that barriers like hunger, poor healthcare, and lack of education stand in the way of achieving it. Kasapis builds on this idea, suggesting that in today's world, internet access is similarly fundamental. He points out that international organisations such as the United Nations and Amnesty International have acknowledged internet access as a right, and notes that the Indian Supreme Court formally recognised it in January 2020. Throughout the article, Kasapis shows how the pandemic intensified pre-existing social inequalities, particularly the digital divide. With social distancing in place, access to digital platforms became essential for work, education, shopping, and healthcare. Those without internet access found themselves excluded from participating in the digital economy - unable to earn, study, or even access crucial information. This, he argues, amounts to a new form of inequality: digital inequality, layered on top of economic inconsistencies. Kasapis also critiques the capitalist system, highlighting the great contrast between billionaires like Jeff Bezos, who increased their fortunes during the pandemic, and the nearly half of the global population still lacking reliable internet access. For him, information and access are inseparable - yet access remains concentrated in the hands of the few. Towards the end of the article, Kasapis raises two pressing questions: Should every citizen have internet access, regardless of income? And who should be responsible for governing the internet? He ultimately advocates for a fair and democratic digital society - one based in human rights and collective decision-making about the future of the internet.

Critical Reflection

Kasapis' argument is powerful, especially given the timing. By establishing internet access in broader conversations about human rights, he portrays the digital divide not just as a technical or economic issue, but a moral/ethical one. His use of Allende's example gives the article a strong ethical foundation, and the pandemic context only strengthens his call to action. Kasapis makes a convincing case that internet access is no longer a luxury - it is a necessity for existance in our society. That said, while his argument is persuasive, the article sometimes remains quite broad. Kasapis clearly outlines why universal internet access matters, but he does not dig deeply into the structural barriers that make it so difficult to achieve. For instance, although he critiques capitalism and corporate power, he leaves out a detailed analysis of how infrastructure ownership, private monopolies, and political conflicts complicate the push for universal access. I think, had he included more concrete examples - such as specific government initiatives or obstacles – that would have made his case even stronger. Compared to Ballatore, Graham, and Sen's (2017) work on Digital Hegemonies, Kasapis' article feels broader and more normative. Ballatore et al. show that even when people have internet access, what they see online is shaped by hidden overseers, like algorithmic bias. Their research reminds us that access alone isn't enough - control over information is equally important. If Kasapis had expanded his discussion to include issues like digital literacy, platform governance, and censorship, his argument would have captured more of the full picture. Similarly, when read alongside Greenstein, Forman, and Goldfarb's (2018) work in How Geography Shapes-and Is Shaped by-the Internet, it becomes clear that simply being connected is only part of the story. Greenstein et al. show that rural areas, even within digitally advanced countries, often suffer from slower speeds and worse service compared to urban centres. In other words, true digital equality would need to address not just whether people have access, but how good that access is - in terms of speed, reliability, affordability, and local relevance. Kasapis' article shines when it challenges readers to think of the internet as a public and basic human right, like water or electricity. His call for democratic governance of the digital space is compelling, but it also opens up tough questions: Who gets to define what “fairness” looks like? How do we avoid repeating existing global inequalities in the digital realm? Kasapis could have pointed towards real-world initiatives like the United Nations' Internet Governance Forum (IGF) or global net neutrality debates to strengthen this part of his argument. In short, Kasapis provides a strong ethical starting point, but the complexities of implementation - political, economic, and infrastructural - deserve more attention.

Suggestions for Future Research

Building on Kasapis' call to recognise internet access as a fundamental right, future research could focus on practical ways to achieve this goal globally. One promising area would be studying how public-private partnerships might help expand affordable internet access, especially in rural and marginalised communities. Examples like South Korea's national broadband network or municipal projects in parts of Scandinavia could offer useful models. Another avenue would be moving beyond just "access" to investigate the quality and neutrality of that access. Following Ballatore et al.'s work, future studies could look into how algorithms, monopolies, and governance frameworks affect people's experience online - particularly in underrepresented regions. Geography also matters. As Greenstein, Forman, and Goldfarb (2018) argue, digital infrastructure often replicates old inequalities. Future research could explore how local economic, political, and cultural factors influence digital inclusion - and how to address these uneven patterns sustainably. Finally, given how fast societies have moved toward digital dependency, interdisciplinary research will be crucial. Combining insights from law, policy, ethics, and technology could help develop international frameworks that formally recognise internet access as a human right - while remaining alert to the risks such formalisation might bring.

Conclusion

Kasapis' argument that internet access should be treated as a fundamental human right is timely and compelling, especially against the backdrop of the COVID-19 pandemic. By linking internet access to essential rights like education, healthcare, and employment, he highlights the deep inequalities that digital exclusion creates. However, while his argument lays a strong ethical foundation, it would benefit from deeper engagement with the economic, infrastructural, and political realities that stand in the way of universal access. Comparing Kasapis' work to broader academic debates on digital inequality and governance reveals just how complex the challenge really is. As we move further into an interconnected world, ensuring fair and meaningful internet access will be one of the major human rights challenges of our time - and it will demand sustained attention across academic, legal, and political spheres.

References:

• Ballatore, A., Graham, M. and Sen, S., 2017. Digital hegemonies: The localness of search engine results. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, 107(5), pp. 1194-1215.
• Greenstein, S., Forman, C. and Goldfarb, A., 2018. How geography shapes-and is shaped by-the internet. In: S. Greenstein, C. Forman and A. Goldfarb, eds. 2018. The economics of the internet: Infrastructure, innovation, and regulation. University of Chicago Press. pp. 57-89.
• Kasapis, S., 2020. Internet access is a fundamental right. Especially, amidst a pandemic. Institute for Internet and the Just Society. [online] Available at: Internet Just Society