 |
10
June 2003
The digital agora:
building democratic communities in cyberspace
The Information
Revolution of the late 20th century has undeniably
changed and shaped the way we live our lives
today. Few among us remain untethered to some
form of information and communication technology,
or ICT.
by Tsen-Waye
Tay
 |
| Call of the computer
chip: People rely on information and
communication technology for all kinds
of daily activities. - Getty |
WHETHER IT BE the mobile
phone, computer, satellite dish, telephone,
television, or any other kind of electronic
communication device, the invention of the
computer chip has radically transformed the
social, economic, and political landscape
of modern civilization. So great has the influence
of ICT been that its absence or removal would
fairly render existing modes of civic participation,
interaction and communication significantly
ineffectual.
Indeed, the manner in which people conduct
their daily lives has become, albeit to various
degrees, dependent on the availability of
affordable hard/soft ware. Increasingly, the
access to and ownership and competent application
of the manifold manifestations of ICT serve
as reliable indicators of the success or failure
of industrialised nations and its citizens.
In an increasingly fast-paced and highly competitive
environment, ICT has become the indispensable
means with which to efficiently and effectively
manage society's work and leisure pursuits.
The significance of the Information Revolution
is nowhere more apparent than with the advent
of the Internet. First conceived by the Advanced
Research Projects Agency (ARPA) of the United
States government in 1969, the ARPANet was
a project funded primarily by U.S. military
sources such as the Department
of Defence, and would eventually form
the backbone upon which the Internet was built.
According to www.whatis.com,
the aim of the US government was "to create
a network that would allow users of a research
computer at one university to be able to "talk
to" research computers at other universities".
The main feature of the ARPANet's design,
and also its unique advantage, was the fact
that messages could be "routed or rerouted
in more than one direction", thus allowing
the network to continue functioning "even
if parts of it were destroyed".
Since then, the ARPANet
has burgeoned into the sprawling worldwide
system of computer networks called the Internet.
Today, the "Net" is home to billions of web
pages offering anyone with access to a functioning
computer and a reliable phone or cable connection,
an empowering and mostly unregulated platform
from which to participate in a myriad of life-informing
and life-enhancing activities.
In addition, the Net's suite of multimedia
capabilities has rapidly become available
to larger segments of the public. Declining
costs and increasing sophistication of communication
technology means more people, and from across
a broader socio-economic spectrum of society,
are able to gain access to the spoils of cyberspace.
Net users regularly publish views and opinions,
share and exchange unlimited amounts of information,
network with people of like mind, build and
nurture relationships domestically and internationally,
or sell and purchase goods and services.
Net Usage Flourishes,
Promises of Digital Democracy
Central to the phenomenal growth in the usage
and popularity of the Internet, has been the
widely held conviction of its ability to further
the goals and processes of democracy. Viewed
by many as a technology of empowerment, the
Internet has heralded a radical transformation
of political and commercial arenas.
 |
| Chip in hand: The
power for good and bad. 21st century
invention, the microchip, may be the
key to the liberation of public expression.
- Getty |
Many have proclaimed the
ability of the Internet to decentralise the
hierarchical structures of power. It was widely
believed that its virtual and unregulated
corridors would enable users to engage in
greater freedoms of speech, information and
assembly. People, it seemed would have an
unparalleled access to data, and would also
have more scope for disseminating and presenting
their own information.
"On the optimistic side is the promise of
e-democracy - that through the Internet we
can participate in public policy construction
in ways never before imagined," says Randy
Stoecker in his paper Cyberspace vs. Face
to face: Community Organising in the New Millenium.
On the flipside, Stoecker says that while
cyberspace is the embodiment of information
democracy, the lack of regulations on web
content makes it impossible to tell what information
is good or bad.
In his book, Future Active: Media Activism
and the Internet, Graham Meikle notes
the striking parallels between radio and the
Internet. He says many people had previously
predicted radio's inherent potential for democracy,
stating it could be "the most wonderful public
communication system imaginable, a gigantic
system of channels…capable not only of
transmitting but of receiving, not of isolating
[the user], but connecting [the user]".
Moreover, Meikle adds that radio pundits had
suggested, "Users of this technology could
leap around the world [and wipe] out for all
time the age-old barriers of race and language
and distance". It would also give the public
"access to information" to let them see through
"the rhetorical tricks of politicians". Eventually
this newfound freedom would result in a government
that was "a living thing to its citizens",
and create "a new kind of statesman" and a
"new kind of voter".
Traditional institutions of power, such as
government and media, have been quick to jump
on the virtual bandwagon. Former US Vice President
Al Gore was a vocal believer in the democratising
power of the Internet. Meikle quotes Al Gore,
from a 1995 article in The
Economist, as claiming the Internet would
herald "a new Athenian age of democracy".
Incidentally, Al Gore had also, to the chagrin
of the ICT community, taken credit for creating
the Internet and for popularising the term
"information superhighway".
Influential social commentators such as Howard
Rheingold have also been enthusiastic
advocates. Rheingold wrote in The Virtual
Community that the Internet had the ability
to "revitalise citizen-based democracy". While
Mark Malloch Brown from the United
Nations Development Programme argues,
"The Internet has become both the fuel and
the vehicle for a dramatic spread in democracy,
intensifying demand for and supporting the
spread of genuinely transparent and participatory
and more efficient systems of government at
both the national and global levels."
Malloch Brown notes in his article, Democracy
and the Information Revolution that while
the number of democracies worldwide has doubled
in less than a decade, many governments still
remain unaccountable to their electorate.
The Internet, he believes, has the capacity
to change this.
According to him, the new communications technology
would offer "greater citizen input into decision-making
and better social services". For him the Internet
is a necessary tool for linking new civil
society networks to key issues such as global
warming and women's empowerment, as well as
to encourage the outcomes of globalisation
to be more responsive to the needs of developing
countries and the poor.
Through the Looking
Glass
Who can refute the seemingly anarchic nature
of the Internet - with its borderless expanse
of autonomous and decentralised networks.
Attempts by governments and corporations to
control, police, monitor, and censor the Net
and its users have proved to be tricky: difficult
but not entirely impossible.
The sheer volume of data and information in
cyberspace, the rapid and exponential growth
of online content, plus the ability to remain
anonymous, would necessarily ensure that sustained
surveillance would require a substantial boost
in human and technological resources. Not
unachievable, but extremely impractical. Such
efforts are likely to be costly and time-consuming,
and have little or no guarantee of achieving
its goals.
So what future do we envision for the Net?
How can we best apply information and communications
technology to advance the processes of civil
accountability and responsible governance?
A lecturer at the University of Technology,
Sydney, John Goodman, suggests, "In alerting
people to deficits, and finding cracks in
the system often outside of the immediate
local or national context, [the Internet can]
force power to reveal what they would not
otherwise wish to be revealed."
Can the Internet continue to fulfil its promise
of liberating public expression? Will it succeed
in its capacity to impose the checks and balances
necessary to sustain a free marketplace of
ideas, opinions and information? And how will
online communities use the global reach of
the Internet to achieve positive social and
political change?
There are no straightforward answers to these
questions. But what seems certain for now
at least, is that the Internet will thrive
as an autonomous and democratising medium,
in so far as: 1) the public is willing to
engage in lively debate and discussion about
its future; and 2) activist groups continue
to use the Internet to enhance campaign strategies
against political, economic and social injustices
and inequalities.
Impassioned advocate of basic rights and freedoms
for users of networked systems, the Electronic
Frontiers of Australia, says that at no
time in the history of Net activism has an
organisation like itself been more important.
"We are surrounded on all sides by moves
to restrict, censor and contain what we can
say, see or do on the Internet. In Australia
and internationally, there are moves to enforce
copyright provisions that are far more restrictive
and extreme than those that exist in traditional
media."
"Governments around the world are moving
to censor material, for cultural, social and
political reasons. Security agencies are attempting
to prevent businesses and individuals from
keeping their communications totally private…ordinary
citizens are becoming more and more cynical
about the role, motives and integrity of those
who would seek to impose their will upon the
Net community."
To combat this attack on e-civil liberties,
EFA suggests, "We can either stand by
and watch the Net reduced to a mere shadow
of its full potential, or we can make our
voices heard for the cause of free speech,
liberty, and privacy."
It declares, "The future is in our hands."
|
|
