[11607] in Commercialization & Privatization of the Internet
Re: NII & Service to the Poor
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (David Rothman)
Mon Apr 11 02:41:32 1994
In-Reply-To: <199404102117.AA09917@radiomail.net>
Date: Sun, 10 Apr 94 23:26:29 -0400
To: "Bill Frezza" <frezza@radiomail.net>
Cc: rre-maintainers@weber.ucsd.edu, kgs@panix.com, pagre@weber.ucsd.edu,
com-priv@psi.com, gbolles@nwc.com, opfer@radiomail.net,
farber@central.cis.upenn.edu, barlow@eff.org, frezza@aol.com
From: "David Rothman" <rothman@netcom.com>
Reply-To: rothman@netcom.com
>Lead by organizations like Mitch Kapor's Electronic Frontier Foundation
>and Ralph Nader's Taxpayer Assets Project, supported by a phalanx of
>tenured academics long accustomed to public subsidization, and supplied
>with emotional ammunition by grass roots workers like Ms. Schneider,
>these New Age Intellectual Poverty Pundits are determined to define,
>create, and manage a new form of public entitlement.
Having written more than a few articles about government waste and
bungles, including anti-poverty debacles at the local level, I
understand your fears. Still, I don't think it's time to change "Let
them eat cake" to "Let them watch Roseanne." Karen Schneider is trying
to update Andrew Carnegie's idea that libraries can be poor people's
universities. I wish more librarians were as usefully earnest as she is.
We need a thousand Schneiders.
And the EFF? I find it ironic that you're talking about an alliance
between Mitch Kapor and freeloaders. As I recall, he gave the world
1-2-3--leading to the creation of hundreds of millions of dollars of new
wealth. EFF by the way has been especially attentive to the needs of
small businesses. Without these people, mom-and-pop firms would be
worse off; consider all the legions of lobbyists watching out for the
interests of IBM-sized companies.
Nader? He himself may not be on the 'Net, but his followers such as
Jamie Love are, and they aren't just watching out for the poor--witness
Love's efforts to make SEC records affordable to individual investors.
*Captialists*!
Please note that I'm hardly a dogmatic booster of either the
Clinton-style NII or some of the public interest community's
alternatives. I'm disappointed that Al Gore made a major NII speech in
Hollywood as opposed to the Library of Congress; I'd like to see more
emphasis on e-books for the home, and less on dial-up Terminators. Why
is it that Washington appointed just one librarian and one
already-overworked K-12 educator to the NII Advisory Council? Too, the
Administration seems oblivious *so far* to some major opportunities for
synergy. The same pen-interface machines used for e-books and school
networking, for example, could be used to promote e-forms to stimulate
commerce and reduce the burden of government paperwork. A focused
government-industry effort could dramatically drive down the cost of the
technology for rich and poor alike, but so far the White House still
hasn't acted, at least not publicly.
Just the same, a lot of people in DC have their hearts are in the right
place. I've been writing on high tech for a decade; but, in another
incarnation, I covered a poverty beat in a factory town. The folks I met
were *tired* at the end of the day. Imagine how much they could have
learned from e-books (not just texts but also a wide selection of
popular works of appeal to them) and interactive TV (ideally pointing
them in the direction of books when appropriate). And if the poor don't
want to improve themselves, should we deprive their children of this
opportunity? Better that we offer decent schools and
libraries--traditional and electronic--than just more food stamps.
Granted, technology isn't a panacea; we also need school reforms and a
culture more attuned to the needs of families and children. But high
tech for the masses would help.
I know that many on the Internet wouldn't consider your remarks to be
worth a byte of reply; but the 'Net is hardly the world at large. Many
voters in the offline universe would agree with every syllable of your
"Pearls before Swin" essay. I myself share your worries that tax money
and user-to-user subsidies could be misused if DC bungles this. At any
rate, I hope that you'll reflect, keep an open mind on my post, and,
meanwhile, spread it among those unfamiliar with the promise of the new
technology.
Peace,
David Rothman
**************************************************************************
David H. Rothman "So we beat on, boats against
rothman@netcom.com the current...."
805 N. Howard St., #240
Alexandria, Va. 22304
703-370-6540(o)(h)
I *encourage* online reproduction of my public postings.
Permission hereby granted--implicit, explicit, whatever. Down
with unnecessary restrictions on the flow of knowledge!
**************************************************************************
