|
II. ABOUT THE INTERNET
7. The
Internet has a number of striking features. It is instantaneous, immediate,
worldwide, decentralized, interactive, endlessly expandable in contents and
outreach, flexible and adaptable to a remarkable degree. It is egalitarian, in
the sense that anyone with the necessary equipment and modest technical skill
can be an active presence in cyberspace, declare his or her message to the
world, and demand a hearing. It allows individuals to indulge in anonymity,
role-playing, and fantasizing and also to enter into community with others and
engage in sharing. According to users' tastes, it lends itself equally well to
active participation and to passive absorption into “a narcissistic,
self-referential world of stimuli with near-narcotic effects”. 15 It can be used to break down the isolation
of individuals and groups or to deepen it.
8. The
technological configuration underlying the Internet has a considerable bearing
on its ethical aspects: People have tended to use it according to the way it
was designed, and to design it to suit that kind of use. This ‘new' system in fact dates
back to the cold war years of the 1960s, when it was intended to foil nuclear
attack by creating a decentralized network of computers holding vital data. Decentralization
was the key to the scheme, since in this way, so it was reasoned, the loss of
one or even many computers would not mean the loss of the data.
An idealistic vision of the
free exchange of information and ideas has played a praiseworthy part in the
development of the Internet. Yet its decentralized configuration and the
similarly decentralized design of the World Wide Web of the late 1980s also
proved to be congenial to a mindset opposed to anything smacking of legitimate
regulation for public responsibility. An exaggerated individualism regarding
the Internet thus emerged. Here, it was said, was a new realm, the marvelous
land of cyberspace, where every sort of expression was allowed and the only law
was total individual liberty to do as one pleased. Of course this meant that
the only community whose rights and interests would be truly recognized in
cyberspace was the community of radical libertarians. This way of thinking
remains influential in some circles, supported by familiar libertarian
arguments also used to defend pornography and violence in the media generally. 16
Although radical
individualists and entrepreneurs obviously are two very different groups, there
is a convergence of interests between those who want the Internet to be a place
for very nearly every kind of expression, no matter how vile and destructive,
and those who want it to be a vehicle of untrammeled commercial activity on a
neo-liberal model that “considers profit and the law of the market as its only parameters,
to the detriment of the dignity of and the respect due to individuals and
peoples”. 17
9. The
explosion of information technology has increased the communication
capabilities of some favored individuals and groups many times over. The
Internet can serve people in their responsible use of freedom and democracy,
expand the range of choices available in diverse spheres of life, broaden
educational and cultural horizons, break down divisions, promote human
development in a multitude of ways. “The free flow of images and speech on a global scale is transforming
not only political and economic relations between peoples, but even our
understanding of the world. It opens up a range of hitherto unthinkable
possibilities”. 18 When based upon
shared values rooted in the nature of the person, the intercultural dialogue
made possible by the Internet and other media of social communication can be “a privileged means for building the civilization of love”. 19
But that is not the whole
story. “Paradoxically,
the very forces which can lead to better communication can also lead to
increasing self-centeredness and alienation”. 20
The Internet can unite people, but it also can divide them, both as individuals
and as mutually suspicious groups separated by ideology, politics, possessions,
race and ethnicity, intergenerational differences, and even religion. Already
it has been used in aggressive ways, almost as a weapon of war, and people
speak of the danger of ‘cyber-terrorism.' It would be
painfully ironic if this instrument of communication with so much potential for
bringing people together reverted to its origins in the cold war and became an
arena of international conflict.
|