SCN: Republic.com

[Steve]

x-no-archive: yes   

================================   


Book review:  Republic.com  

Exploring the effects of cyberspace on American democracy  

Book excerpt:  

"A well-functioning system of free expression must meet two 
distinctive requirements.  

First, people should be exposed to materials that they would not 
have chosen in advance. Unplanned, unanticipated encounters are 
central to democracy itself. Such encounters often involve topics 
and points of view that people have not sought out and perhaps find 
quite irritating. They are important partly to ensure against 
fragmentation and extremism, which are predictable outcomes of 
any situation in which like-minded people speak only with 
themselves. I do not suggest that government should force people 
to see things that they wish to avoid. But I do contend that in a 
democracy deserving the name, people often come across views 
and topics that they have not specifically selected.   

Second, many or most citizens should have a range of common 
experiences. Without shared experiences, a heterogeneous society 
will have a much more difficult time in addressing social problems. 
People may even find it hard to understand one another. Common 
experiences, emphatically including the common experiences made 
possible by the media, provide a form of social glue. A system of 
communications that radically diminishes the number of such 
experiences will create a number of problems, not least because of 
the increase in social fragmentation."   


(Stephen Labaton, NY Times)---The Internet has been hailed as the 
ultimate tool of autonomy. The evangelists of cyberspace tout the 
power it confers on users to assemble a universe of information, 
shop effortlessly virtually anywhere and communicate instantly 
across continents. Thanks to the Internet, it has become easier than 
ever to see what you want when you want, and filter out all the rest. 
To the Internet's architects and boosters, this development 
represents a triumph of consumer choice.     

''Customized information is a natural extension,'' Bill Gates 
predicted just as the Internet began taking off in 1995. ''For your own 
daily dose of news, you might subscribe to several review services 
and let a software agent or a human one pick and choose from them 
to compile your completely customized 'newspaper.' These 
subscription services, whether human or electronic, will gather 
information that conforms to a particular philosophy and set of 
interests.''     

But what Gates hailed as a great liberating force is, in Cass 
Sunstein's view, a potentially grave threat to democratic 
governance. Internet technology, he contends, encourages people to 
limit their exposure to like-minded viewpoints. It offers a powerful 
new weapon to fringe groups and reinforces extremism. It sharply 
reduces the kinds of chance and occasionally unwanted encounters 
that foster discussion and broaden people's thinking.     

Sunstein, a professor at the University of Chicago, has written 
extensively on constitutional law and free speech. His latest effort, 
''Republic.com,'' is exceptionally well timed, examining the 
important political questions surrounding a medium that 
increasingly shapes the way we think.   

Exploring the effects of cyberspace on American democracy, 
Sunstein brings a thoughtful perspective to the unanticipated 
problems of a world in which an increasing amount of information is 
transmitted over the Internet. He casts a wide philosophical and 
historical net, invoking the opinions of jurists like Louis Brandeis 
and Oliver Wendell Holmes as well as the writings of Amartya Sen 
and John Dewey. But for all his erudition, Sunstein writes in a clear 
and inviting style that brings wisdom to even the most obvious of 
points.    

The mistake of the Internet evangelists, he maintains, is a confusion 
of consumer sovereignty, the idea behind free markets, and political 
sovereignty, the idea behind free nations. Sunstein's thesis is that 
the emergence of what the writer Nicholas Negroponte calls ''The 
Daily Me'' -- a customized account of the world made possible 
through filtering software that uniquely suits one's tastes -- is the 
natural byproduct of an egocentric medium that enables us to 
insulate ourselves from ideas to which we are hostile or indifferent. 
Not only are consumer sovereignty and political sovereignty not the 
same, but also, Sunstein writes, ''a commitment to consumer 
sovereignty may well compromise political sovereignty.''    

The culture of the Internet presents unusual challenges for a country 
with a tradition of free expression. The notion, for instance, that 
public streets and parks are open to speakers and protesters, an 
essential feature of an enlightened democracy, is grounded in the 
belief that speakers should have access to an audience and that 
listeners ought to be exposed to a diversity of views. But this 
central idea behind what lawyers call the public forum doctrine is 
lost entirely on the Internet, which, while it gives a platform to 
anyone with a computer and a telephone, also permits everyone 
else to tune out the dissenter and live in a sheltered world.    

Far from being a Luddite, Sunstein sees the obvious benefits of the 
Internet. ''Many of the emerging technologies,'' he writes, ''are 
extraordinarily social, increasing people's capacity to form bonds 
with individuals and groups that would otherwise have been entirely 
inaccessible.'' But he warns that the Internet can also be a 
dangerous force when used to reinforce society's worst stereotypes 
or to fan unfounded rumors. Indeed, it is hardly surprising that a 
growing number of hate groups have found large audiences on the 
Web.    

Sunstein concludes that the Internet's polarizing tendencies can be 
fixed only through careful initiatives by the government and private 
companies. He effectively dismisses the notion that the Internet is 
an unregulated medium, for surely it is no less governed by 
principles of criminal, property and contracts law than any other 
technology. He suggests that policy makers and those with Web 
presences should do what they can to promote exposure to different 
views.    

The idea is not without precedent. Cable companies are required by 
''must-carry'' rules to reserve a certain number of channels for local 
and other kinds of programming in order to promote a range of 
voices. Broadcasters must allot a certain amount of time for 
educational television. And until the ''fairness doctrine'' was 
repealed, television and radio broadcasters were obliged to give air 
time to politicians and others who were criticized on their channels.   
 

In the case of the Internet, such ''must-carry'' provisions would be 
relatively simple to implement: Web sites would be required to 
provide hyperlink references to opposing views. Sunstein does not 
go so far as to suggest that the government impose such a 
requirement, but he says it is not unreasonable for Web sites to 
regulate themselves voluntarily, in the interest of democratic 
dialogue. ''No government agency compels adults to read or to 
watch,'' he concludes. ''Nonetheless, a central democratic goal is to 
ensure a large measure of social integration -- not merely of racial 
groups, but across multiple lines, in a way that broadens 
sympathies and enriches human life.''    

''Republic.com'' raises important and troubling questions about the 
effects of the Internet on a democratic society. Sunstein's 
assessment is persuasive, as he attempts to balance the need for a 
solution to the problems he has identified against the limited role 
the government ought to play in regulating the Internet. Though 
Sunstein hardly has all the answers, he performs an important 
service in casting a skeptical light on a medium more often seen as 
a utopian technology than as a potentially corrosive force.    

Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company   





* * * * * * * * * * * * * *  From the Listowner  * * * * * * * * * * * *
.	To unsubscribe from this list, send a message to:
majordomo at scn.org		In the body of the message, type:
unsubscribe scn
==== Messages posted on this list are also available on the web at: ====
* * * * * * *     http://www.scn.org/volunteers/scn-l/     * * * * * * *