Here's an interesting article from today's NYT about the future of governance of the internet. Interestingly, the issue applies more broadly as well: government v. individual rule, etc.:
July 10, 2001
Survey About Accountability Online
By AMY HARMON
If the American public could elect a
governing body for the Internet, candidates
would include the Pope, William H. Gates,
Oprah Winfrey, teachers, ex-hackers and
"regular folks," according to the first major
study of public attitudes about accountability
on the Internet, to be released today by the
Markle Foundation, a nonprofit group that
focuses on public policy and technology.
The ever-expanding citizenry of the Internet
— 63 percent of American adults now go
online, up from 39 percent in 1998, according
to the report — is not likely to have that
opportunity anytime soon. But Markle's
yearlong inquiry found that Americans would
like to have significantly more say into the
rules that govern the Internet. Not only that,
but they would like a variety of people and
institutions to pitch in, and members of focus
groups suggested a range of participants in a
hypothetical national commission.
"There is a strong desire on the part of the
public to have their values respected as the technology developed and some
markers laid out as to what those values are," Markle's president, Zoë Baird, said.
"People are looking for more democratic decision-making in a medium that has such
widespread consequences for our personal and civic lives."
That may mean finding a way to wield public influence in decisions about privacy,
the quality of information and consumer protection, power now typically left to
business executives and technologists who design software, Ms. Baird said, because
in many ways, technology has replaced government as the main regulator of online
behavior.
Markle's study, which included telephone and online polling and focus groups of the
public and of Internet experts, found enormous enthusiasm for the Internet, with 83
percent of those who use it having a positive view and 79 percent saying it had
made their lives easier.
But the zeal was tempered by the view of about half of those surveyed that the
Internet is a "source of worry" because of concerns that include pornography,
privacy violations and poor connection speeds. Fifty-nine percent of those polled
said they did not know who they would turn to if they had a problem.
Many focus-group participants wished for the equivalent of the safety net that exists
for credit card fraud, a phone number they can call when their card is stolen or there
is a billing error. Seventy percent said users have to question what they read on the
Internet, and more than half — 54 percent — said they did not believe they had the
same rights and protections online as off.
To some extent, the frustrations are a reflection of the impersonal nature of the
Internet. It is hard to imagine a single help line for the myriad problems one can
encounter. Among the experts on the focus groups, a common view was that
individual rights carried over to the Internet, but that traditional safeguards, like the
ability to size up a store by its location and appearance, do not exist.
The desire to make the Internet more closely mirror the world off- line was
underscored by the response to the much-debated issue of taxation, where 60
percent said that online purchases should be taxed, despite the efforts of some
lawmakers and Web sites to keep the Internet tax free.
Still, the sharp frustrations amid the general embrace of the Internet raise the
concern that the medium may not live up to its potential unless the public has a sense
of more control over its choices, Ms. Baird said. Although 60 percent of those
surveyed said rules for governing the Internet should be mostly developed and
enforced by the private sector, 64 percent also said that "government should
develop rules to protect people" on the Internet.
Ms. Baird, who has been working with standards-making bodies and world
governments to establish forums in which companies, governments, nonprofit groups
and public representatives could be heard on questions of Internet policy, said the
report reinforced the need to build that constituency before an "online oil spill"
alienates the public.
But not everyone agrees that the Internet needs more regulation. Esther Dyson, the
former chairman of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, or
Icann, the agency that controls the Internet address system, said that users, and not
a governing body, could better govern the Internet through which Web sites they
visit and what goods they buy.
"I've found people want democracy, but they're often unwilling to do the work,
whether it's looking at voting records or taking the most basic measures to protect
their own privacy," said Ms. Dyson, who serves on a committee that is trying to
increase public representation in Icann. "Frankly sometimes you don't need
democracy, you need a market where people understand what's being offered and
choose what they want."
Still, both positions could be heard in the response of a young focus- group
participant from Syosset, N.Y., when asked who should make the rules that govern
the Internet. "We should," the participant said. "The people." |
