Globe Telecom recently released an open letter addressed to its customers living in areas where connectivity is, might we say, a little scarce. The letter basically pinpointed the issues the company has that caused the dilemma, namely prohibition of various homeowner’s associations (HOAs) of the construction of cell sites and other telecom facilities which are imperative for sufficient mobile and internet coverage. This raised 2 points begging to be discussed in this section:

The right to internet access

This has come as a surprise to me since I was initially unaware that our society has evolved in such a way that easy digital access to information has become so vital to our daily lives, to a point for it to even be considered a human right. In retrospect, however, it actually makes sense. Our web usage has become so integrated to every aspect of modern civilization that it has actually found its niche in almost all industries, even building one for its own. To say the least, people who have access to it secures a considerably unfair advantage in life over those who don’t. Now, to actively deny such to even just a minority is already a violation of said rights and must not be acceptable, especially if the reasons were proven to be invalid. This brings us to:

Fears of the people in power

Reading the letter reminded me of one quote about GM foods I had stumbled upon somewhere in the web. It says, “What’s scary about the misinformation with plant genetics is that the poorest people, those who most need the technology, maybe denied access because of the fears and prejudices of those who have enough to eat.” Now, this may seem very non-sequitur but hear me out. Concerns about health risks that cell sites could pose on citizens which are argued by these HOAs have been refuted by both the country’s Department of Health and the world’s, well, World Health Organization.

I don’t even need to talk about the legitimacy of these agencies so let’s just go on. To continue using this as an excuse to deny others quality internet coverage is just reckless & uncompromising tenacity. In the same way as the aforementioned quote, it’s the fear of those above that dictates whether those who have greater need of access could have it or not.

Now that’s not to say that deprivation is the case here but the point is, if you have the means to give others better products & services at the cost of no harm, then why not?

But yeah, that’s just my opinion…