 |
 |
 |
Mass media: The Internet
|
|||
|
Mass media: The Internet
|
To be honest, this is all pretty unstructured, but I have attempted to impose a (somewhat arbitrary) structure on it. This is roughly it:
I'm keenly and embarrassedly aware that there's a lot missing from this and would encourage you to follow up the external links dotted throughout this section as well as those listed at its end.
You are probably familiar with the distinction between market and public service models of the media. If you are not, you may find it worth consulting the sections on broadcasting systems and public service. Both of those articles relate to 'traditional' broadcasting media, but the arguments are essentially the same whatever medium we are talking about. It seems to me that I have covered the arguments for and against each model reasonably thoroughly in each of those articles, so I shall not again rehearse them here. For some researchers, the choice between these two models is the question of future Internet development, for others it is simply an irrelevance. To me it does not seem that technology is politically or ideologically neutral, nor is the market which produces the technology in the first place, nor the market in which its further development takes place.
I think the fate of the Internet is pretty well sealed in this respect. Before Clinton and Gore were elected, there was much rhetoric about their perception of the importance of a 'social responsibility' or 'public service' model of the Internet, which was to be made available in the USA through their 
National Information Infrastructure
(NII) Agenda For Action. Vice-President Gore in particular had during his years as a senator agitated strongly for the construction of a National Research and Education Network. However, with the Telecommunications Reform Act 1996, the intended public service policy was reversed, since the Act was an acceptance by the Republican legislature and the Democratic Presidency that the development of the Internet, together with the broader convergence of digital technologies, should be driven by free-market competition. Whilst introducing certain limitations on the content of broadcasting, the Act has turned the technological development of digital communication technologies and the ownership and determination of their content into a free-for-all competition between the major corporations. Herbert Schiller (1995) argues that this was inevitable since the post-war doctrine of the 'free flow of information' as a high-flown democratic principle is in fact designed to confer a major advantage on US media corporations.
In the European Union, which one might have expected to be more interventionist and less inclined to adopt a laissez-faire free market approach, there has, as far as I know, been no attempt to legislate for a public service model of the Internet. Indeed, the Bangemann Report, urging the EU to throw itself into digital communications development without delay, lest market opportunities and jobs are lost, is quite clear that the development should be driven by market forces:
This Report urges the European Union to put its faith in market mechanisms as the motive power to carry us into the Information Age.
This means that actions must be taken at the European level and by Member States to strike down entrenched positions which put Europe at a competitive disadvantage:
- it means fostering an entrepreneurial mentality to enable the emergence of new dynamic sectors of the economy
- it means developing a common regulatory approach to bring forth a competitive, Europe-wide, market for information services
- it does NOT mean more public money, financial assistance, subsidies, dirigisme, or protectionism.
Members of the High-Level Group on the Information Society Martin Bangemann et al May 94
Does it matter whether a public service model underlies the development of the Internet and related technologies? To an extent, your opinion on that is likely to be determined by your stance on public service versus deregulation in the conventional broadcast media. Do you take the view that public service broadcasting has ensured higher quality content than the commercial networks? Do you share Neil Postman's view that commercial broadcasting encourages us to 'amuse ourselves to death' (1987), that market competition inevitably leads to 'dumbing down' of the audience? Or do you take Rupert Murdoch's view that public service broadcasting is institutionalized paternalism, élitism and snobbery?
I would expect that your attitude towards deregulation in broadcasting is likely to inform your judgment on the commercialization of the Internet. It is interesting to note, incidentally, that it's not at all uncommon nowadays to find left-wing critics of public service broadcasting suddenly becoming vociferous defenders of it. They had previously criticized public service broadcasting for its paternalism, for its maintenance of the dominant bourgeois ideology and so on. In my view those criticisms were justified since public service broadcasting systems had not proven to be a defence of the public sphere, but rather often sought to control the public sphere (the notion of public sphere is discussed below). Such critics now frequently seem to be taking Chomsky's view that , in view of the evidently corrosive effect of free market values, it would be preferable, even for an anarchist like Chomsky, at least temporarily to defend the institutions of the democratic state to the extent that they constitute a bulwark against the market.
It's perhaps worth noting that, historically, there were sound technological grounds for the central regulation of TV and radio, namely that the available spectrum was not wide enough to accommodate a free-for-all and portions of the spectrum therefore had to be rationed. Centralized rationing of that sort does not, of course, necessarily lead to a public service system of broadcasting, as can be seen by comparing the US and British broadcasting models, both of which are based on some kind of licensing of available frequencies, but which are nonetheless radically different models of the rôle of broadcasting. The fact that governments were virtually obliged to get involved in such rationing did at least prepare the ground for the elaboration of a public service model if national governments chose to develop their broadcasting systems in that way. Where the Internet is concerned there is, by and large, no similar scarcity and therefore no requirement for government regulation from the outset. From the outset then, the expansion and development of the Internet is not governed by such technical constraints. (Admittedly, there is the fundamental problem of bandwidth, but that is not a fundamental technical constraint since bandwidth can be increased, unlike the radio spectrum which obviously cannot.) Thus the choice of public service or free market model is essentially of a moral/philosophical nature: what, in a democracy, should be the function of the media and is that function best realized by regulation or by the market? The problem is that, if you support the the public service model, your chances of persuading anyone actually making the Internet happen are pretty slim since the years of Reagan's and Thatcher's domination of politics have rendered virtually unassailable the view that state regulation is paternalistic, nannying and inefficient and only the market, if left to its own devices, can provide an efficient Internet.
Again, I have discussed the basic issues elsewhere, for example under the section on media ownership in the UK, where you will find a statement of the Royal Commission on the Press's view of the function of the press in a democracy, as well as a discussion of some of the ways in which deregulation and concentration of ownership may work against the realization of the Commission's ideal. Admittedly, that article is about the press, not the Internet, but the underlying issues seem pretty similar to me.
If left to the market, is it not likely that social exclusion will be paralleled by cyber-exclusion? Mike Davis's dystopian vision of the future of LA predicts that there will be just such a parallel development and that it is already well under way:
urban cyberspace -- as the simulation of the city's information order -- will be experienced as even more segregated, and devoid of true public space, than the traditional built city. Southcentral L.A., for instance, is a data and media black hole, without local cable programming or links to major data systems. Just as it became a housing/jobs ghetto in the early twentieth century industrial city, it is now evolving into an electronic ghetto within the emerging information city.
Davis (1995) Chapter 7
Peter Golding (1994) quotes figures which show a clear correlation between household income and access to information and communication technologies (ICTs). Although television ownership is nearly universal, as we might expect, it comes as something of a shock to find that 99.5% of those in the £640 to £800 weekly income bracket (1992 figures) have a telephone whilst only 74.5% of those in the £80 to £100 bracket do and that phone ownership is even lower amongst pensioner and lone parent households, precisely the groups one would expect to need a telephone more than others. Golding argues that the naïvely optimistic expectation that ICT ownership will become more widespread amongst the lower income groups (as proved to be the case with white goods, for example) is unlikely to be fulfilled, firstly because ICTs 'must be fed', requiring constant updating with faster processors and new gizmos and, secondly, because the era (50s and 60s) of equalization in white goods was one of declining inequality, whereas today we clearly live in an era of increasing inequality. In Golding's view we do not live in an information society, but in a misinformed society and
What we have in the misinformed society is, in a cliché which nonetheless carries an unavoidable truth: the growing gap between information-poor and information-rich
(1994 : 471)
Like Mike Davis, Golding sees the distinct likelihood of the emergence of information ghettos. Pretty obviously, someone who can't afford a telephone can't afford to get on the Internet. Certainly, they could always pop into the local cybercafé, but, at current rates, an hour on-line will cost a single unemployed person around 20% of a week's income and even the bus fare to reach the cybercafé in the first place is a hurdle. So they are, in effect, excluded from the information revolution where information is available only at a price:
The mundane arithmetic of domestic economy places huge barriers between large sections of the community and the turnstiles through which the information paradise is gained. For those with the spending power to enjoy the communications bounty, the future beckons enticingly. For others, such goods and services remain luxuries displaced by the pressing needs of food, clothing and shelter.
(1994 : 475)
Golding is quite right, of course, for the moment. However, I don't see that the ghettoization which Davis and Golding fear is an inevitable long-term consequence of the information revolution, even if development is left to the free market. There are quite close parallels between the current stage of Internet development and the early days of radio. Whether we might be justified in seeking solace in an assumption that the Internet will develop in a similar way to such earlier communication technologies, I don't know, but we can, after all, only argue from previous experience.
In the 1920s a radio cost around the same proportion of the average family's income as a decent computer does today, so there's every justification for supposing that hardware costs will fall. I would have thought that it's likely, too, that the technology will also ultimately stabilize, as it has with TV and audio technology - the major change in TV technology was from black and white to colour and the next major change will be from analogue to digital somewhere around 2005; the major changes in audio technology were from 78rpm to 33rpm, from mono to stereo and then from vinyl to CD. All of these changes took place over a time period which proved acceptable, with the high prices of the newer technologies falling rapidly to the price of the older technologies once the early adopter market was saturated.
To move from the early web browsers to the latest version of Internet Explorer has required more RAM and greater processor power. The information providers' response to that has been to produce more demanding web pages, so faster Internet connexions have been required. All in all a seemingly inexorable drain on the individual's funds in an effort to keep up with the information revolution. Nevertheless, if the example of other ICTs is anything to go by, then it seems likely that costs will stabilize. Presumably also, in due course, the investment of time, energy and money in the acquisition of computer literacy will be a quaint memory. If my students happen to see me working at the DOS prompt, they find it unbelievable that it was once necessary to type all that gobbledegook just to create a new folder and move files into it. In due course, it will seem extraordinary that we once had a whole load of keys with letters on to put information into these gadgets and then had to worry about backups, missing .dlls, software upgrades and so on, just as it seems extraordinary that one could once have spent the fortnight before driving off on holiday virtually dismantling and reassembling the car's engine in order to stand a reasonable chance of getting there. There's certainly no guarantee that, say, ten years from now, by when the full convergence of ICTs on digital format will have been concluded, a telephone will be neatly distinguishable from a TV, a radio and a computer; indeed WAP (more likely GSM) technology looks as if it's likely to turn mobile phones into something like computers during the first couple of years of this century. Indeed, by August 2001, we were seeing a considerable increase in digital TV owners using those TVs for e-mail, Web surfing and so on. 20% of interactive TV househoilds were using it for e-mail and 30% of BSkyB subscribers had e-mail accounts. Jupiter UK, the media analysts, predicted that by 2005 half of UK households would have digital TV (source The Guardian 13/08/01). It seems to me also quite likely, in the view of competition from Internet telephony, that on-line charges may also fall in due course.
On the other hand many of the huge amounts of information which are currently free on the Internet will eventually be charged for and/or will be paid for by advertising or sponsorship. Though, here once again, it's not that straightforward - huge numbers of texts which are out of copyright are constantly being digitized and placed on the Internet as e-texts at the Project Gutenberg by Michael Hart, professor of electronic text at Illinois Benedictine College. All of that literature is in the public domain and no charge is made for the time and effort of the volunteers who digitize the text. Naturally, any technology has its unique characteristics, but I can't see what in principle would prevent Internet technology prices from falling just as they have with other
ICTs. If that happens, then, in principle at least, the Internet, far from contributing to and reinforcing social exclusion, ought to militate against it. An obvious example would be, say, a disabled person who is isolated for much of the day and finds it difficult to reach the local library. Such a person could read any of the Project Gutenberg texts and could also become involved in a variety of virtual communities. I'm fairly sanguine about the development of
access to the Net; what is alarming, in my view, is the possibility that the ownership and content of the Internet will follow the same pattern of development as radio's. This is discussed further
below.
According to the government's 2001 White Paper on Communications, 28% of homes in the UK have Internet access. For what it's worth, a Guardian/ICM poll in December 1999 revealed that the number of adults on-line in Britain had grown to 37% from 29% in January of that year and predicted that by the end of 2000 half the adult population would be on-line. Worryingly, though, the survey did reveal that the majority of users were young and wealthy, with 59% of the richest AB social group on-line, as against only 14% of DEs. By the end of 2001 it was reported in the VIPer study conducted by a group of UK media companies that almost 90% of ABs had Internet access, with about 75% having access at home. More than 85% of this social group used the Internet, 50% shopped online, over a third used the Net to read their newspapers online and 21% traded their stocks and shares online (source The Guardian 05/11/01). Furthermore, there's plenty of evidence that the knowledge revolution enriches disproportionately those who work in the digital media in an incestuous circle where those who produce the technology are the most likely to benefit from it financially and although Clinton and Blair trumpet the importance of educating people for the knowledge economy there is every indication that those who are most likely to gain from it financially will remain a relatively small élite while the remaining knowledge workers are employed in data inputting and call centres.
However, whilst, as with virtually any other technology, be it radio, television or WAP telephones, the rich are most likely to be the early adopters, the UK government has stated its intention to redress the balance by making 100,000 computers available to low-income families at low cost, and opening 6000 ukonline centres by the end of 2002. By the same date, all UK schools are to be online and there should be 50,000 learndirect taster courses, free for the unemployed, with 80% discounts on computer literacy courses. The intention is that access should be universal by 2005. It's worth noting, though, that, despite the rhetoric about education, the emphasis in the detail of the UK government's plans tends to be placed squarely on training to meet the needs of business and industry. I am myself a teacher of information technology, a subject which seems to be almost entirely content-free. Students who acquire a qualification in using the Internet are required to use a search engine to find information on a randomly chosen subject, without showing any evidence of interest in what they are searching for or showing any capacity of discrimination between the various sources of information they find. Nor are they expected to express any opinion on those sources' content - the perfect, compliant wage slaves for the digital economy.
Understanding and Using the Internet - links to statistics on web usage and user demographics, internet jargon, internet history, guides and what's new. A useful place to start your exploration.
Center for Democracy and Technology - "The Center For Democracy and Technology is a non-profit public interest organization based in Washington, DC. CDT works for public policies that advance civil liberties and democratic values in new computer and communications technologies". Lively, up-to-the-minute site with plenty of informed discussion of the latest issues and legislation.
Computer-mediated Communication Magazine - some insightful stuff here, some of the essays pushing hypertext to the limit.
CTHEORY Arthur and Marie-Louise Kroker's site. Arthur was described by the BBC as the 'McLuhan of the 90s', so this must be essential reading, especially on the relationship between technology and the body
John December's links to Internet Resources on Computer-Mediated Communication - a comprehensive list of a range of different sites; the focus is not primarily on 'theory', but you'll probably find it useful to scrutinize the practice.
Elektronische Texte zum Thema computervermittelte Kommunikation - list of links to on-line texts on computer-mediated communication, many in English, many available as .zip files
History of Modern Communications (Arthur C Clarke Foundation) - beautifully crafted site with timeline of the development of communication media to the present day. Not specifically Internet-oriented; very useful general resource
Hobbes' Internet Timeline - succinct and readable summary of Internet development.
Hotwired - on-line version of Wired Magazine: quite a few reflections and interviews on information technology and its effects. Sometimes insightful, sometimes loopily enthusiastic.
Hypermedia Research Centre, University of Westminster - an excellent collection of thought-provoking articles by both lecturers and students at the centre, adopting a refreshingly skeptical attitude towards 'cyberbollocks'
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication Annenberg School for Communication University of Southern California
Mark Poster's Home: essential reading
Wendy Robinson's notes for the Duke University course on Ethics and the Internet, which includes exhaustive lists of links to informative and provocative articles
Wendy Robinson's Internet History page with short biographies of all the major pioneers.
Technorealism Manifesto: this should perhaps be your first port of call in following up all the issues discussed in this article. I got a little irritated by it at times because of the sometimes rather patronising attitudes of these critics towards the people who are actually making the whole show work, but I often feel like that about the whole content of my website. nad I have to recognize that there are many 'doers' contributing to this project. Go here and follow up the links and you'll find articles on just about everything you need.
Polly Woolley's Home Page - some fascinating and thought-provoking work here on:
The Writings of Professor Robert M. Young, Centre for
Psychotherapeutic Studies, Sheffield University: 'Science, Ideology and Donna Haraway' - a lengthy, thorough, thoughtful and thought-provoking paper, easily downloadable, but you should be aware that it's not about the Internet in general terms and is really a must only if you have a particular interest in Haraway.
regulation of the Internet
technological determinism
fourth estate
|
Understanding and Using the Internet - links to statistics on web usage and user demographics, internet jargon, internet history, guides and what's new. A useful place to start your exploration.
Center for Democracy and Technology - "The Center For Democracy and Technology is a non-profit public interest organization based in Washington, DC. CDT works for public policies that advance civil liberties and democratic values in new computer and communications technologies". Lively, up-to-the-minute site with plenty of informed discussion of the latest issues and legislation.
Computer-mediated Communication Magazine - some insightful stuff here, some of the essays pushing hypertext to the limit.
CTHEORY Arthur and Marie-Louise Kroker's site. Arthur was described by the BBC as the 'McLuhan of the 90s', so this must be essential reading, especially on the relationship between technology and the body
CyberAtlas for thorough and current statistics on just about every aspect of the Net.
John December's links to Internet Resources on Computer-Mediated Communication - a comprehensive list of a range of different sites; the focus is not primarily on 'theory', but you'll probably find it useful to scrutinize the practice.
Elektronische Texte zum Thema computervermittelte Kommunikation - list of links to on-line texts on computer-mediated communication, many in English, many available as .zip files
History of Modern Communications (Arthur C Clarke Foundation) - beautifully crafted site with timeline of the development of communication media to the present day. Not specifically Internet-oriented; very useful general resource
Hobbes' Internet Timeline - succinct and readable summary of Internet development.
Hotwired - on-line version of Wired Magazine: quite a few reflections and interviews on information technology and its effects. Sometimes insightful, sometimes loopily enthusiastic.
Hypermedia Research Centre, University of Westminster - an excellent collection of thought-provoking articles by both lecturers and students at the centre, adopting a refreshingly skeptical attitude towards 'cyberbollocks'
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication Annenberg School for Communication University of Southern California
Mark Poster's Home: essential reading
Wendy Robinson's notes for the Duke University course on Ethics and the Internet, which includes exhaustive lists of links to informative and provocative articles
Wendy Robinson's Internet History page with short biographies of all the major pioneers.
Technorealism Manifesto: this should perhaps be your first port of call in following up all the issues discussed in this article. I got a little irritated by it at times because of the sometimes rather patronising attitudes of these critics towards the people who are actually making the whole show work, but I often feel like that about the whole content of my website. nad I have to recognize that there are many 'doers' contributing to this project. Go here and follow up the links and you'll find articles on just about everything you need.
Polly
Woolley's Home Page - some fascinating and thought-provoking work here on:
The Writings of Professor Robert M. Young, Centre for
Psychotherapeutic Studies, Sheffield University: 'Science, Ideology and Donna Haraway' - a lengthy, thorough, thoughtful and thought-provoking paper, easily downloadable, but you should be aware that it's not about the Internet in general terms and is really a must only if you have a particular interest in Haraway.
regulation of the Internet
technological determinism
fourth estate
|