New telecommunications technologies can extend—or impede—democracy’s reach. They can make it easier for people to track legislation, express preferences, keep tabs on officeholders, and marshal support for causes. They hold out the promise of giving the disenfranchised a stake in the American political process—and drawing the disenchanted back from political cynicism. But for that to happen, the new telecommunications will have to be appealing and accessible. And policymakers will have to make democratic participation as important a goal of telecommunications policy as consumer convenience and economic growth.
The advanced telecommunications networks being built today could support increased civic participation—or they could encourage sound bites and demagoguery. They could support the electronic equivalent of public spaces, where people come together as informed citizens—or they could provide only electronic malls, where people are targeted as spectators and consumers. At stake here are the workings of democracy.
Traditionally, citizens gleaned political information from a variety of sources—newspapers, television, radio, neighbors—deliberated about issues and candidates with friends and family, and finally voted at the neighborhood polling station. Today, all this can be accomplished from one’s home at a single sitting, providing enormous opportunities for the fulfillment or negation of democracy’s promise.
Faster, cheaper, more diverse, and more interactive communications have shown great potential to increase citizen participation in the democratic process. Electronic mail allows constituents instant and direct communication with their online elected representatives. Scores of communities have created "civic networks"—local computer networks designed to promote civic participation by offering local information and communication at little or no cost. Many federal agencies, as well as a growing number of congressional offices, are online, offering government information and new mechanisms for registering citizen opinion to anyone connected to either the Internet or one of the many commercial computer networks.
People can tap into sources of information useful for informed participation in democratic processes—to see how a piece of proposed legislation is proceeding or how an officeholder has voted. They can communicate simultaneously with fellow constituents on matters of importance to the community. And they can see how advocacy groups elsewhere have effectively influenced local decision making. The new telecommunications technologies that make up the emerging National Information Infrastructure (NII) could thus do much to extend the reach of participatory democracy. They could:
Some of this is already happening. Widespread use of video conferencing, 1-800 numbers, online candidate information, and other novel services in the 1994 congressional campaigns showed how telecommunications can change the conduct of electoral politics. Call-in shows, computer conferencing, and e-mail give voters new means of access to public officials, political candidates, and commentators. State and local versions of C-SPAN provide millions of cable households a daily window on state and local politics. As public access to these technologies expands, so, too, will their uses.
Across the country, pioneers are integrating interactive technology with the political process. Their experiments can inform future advocates for democratic telecommunications policies.
Informing Citizens. By guaranteeing freedom of the press, the Bill of Rights assures citizen access to many varied information sources. But in today’s complicated world, it is often difficult to locate useful information about candidates, government policy, or legislation. By linking thousands of databases, the National Information Infrastructure could provide access to the information necessary for citizens to make informed choices. These information resources help engage voters on substance rather than style and help get beyond 30-second advertisements, shorter and shorter sound bites, and horse-race campaign coverage.
In 1994, the Public Information Exchange, League of Women Voters Education Fund, and Project Vote Smart teamed up to inaugurate the Voter Online Information & Communication Exchange (VOICE) project. This first phase of an expected nationwide effort received more than 2,500 inquiries in 2 weeks from the 4 public libraries in which it was housed—Columbus, Ohio; Evanston, Illinois; Oakland, California; and St. Petersburg, Florida. Citizens could find candidate profiles for local, state, and national campaigns in addition to polling place information, voting information, candidate voting records, campaign contributions, and third-party ratings of candidates.
The California Voter Foundation, with computer space donated by Pacific Bell, established an Online Voter Guide for the 1994 election. Information on 32 statewide candidates and candidate job descriptions detailing the duties, salaries, and past and present officeholders was provided by the California Journal, the Center for Civic Literacy, and the candidates themselves. There were 14,000 logins over 5 weeks.
The Democracy Network, run by the Los Angeles-based Center for Governmental Studies, is a working prototype of an interactive video, textual, and audio campaign guide. The 1994 prototype contained video clips of gubernatorial candidates’ speeches, policy positions, and campaign advertisements, all of which could be found by simply clicking on the appropriate icon—either on a computer monitor or on a television screen using a mouse or remote control.
Imagine if these offerings were available in every community—say, at libraries, polling stations, and other public places. Or if people could use them as easily as they get cash from automatic teller machines, as Linda Tarr-Whelan of the Center for Policy Alternatives postulates.
Broadening Deliberation. Perhaps the greatest promise of the National Information Infrastructure is its potential to restore "town hall" deliberations to American politics. As the political system becomes more professional, and personal schedules become more hectic and less flexible, citizens no longer have the opportunity to convene at a specific time in a specific place. But interactive telecommunications technologies allow citizens from all walks of life to discuss issues and politics relevant to their communities at their convenience.
For example, in 1994 the Minnesota e-Democracy project created an electronic meeting space where candidates could answer public questions and critique their opponents—and where citizens could find detailed political information on Minnesota politics, comment on the candidates, and discuss the democratic process. The project was Internet-based and was housed on the Twin Cities Free-Net. There were more than 40,000 information retrievals. While public reaction was overwhelmingly favorable, it is telling that some citizens complained that the candidates merely recycled campaign stump speeches during online debates, rather than thoroughly addressing issues. This reflects the candidates’ unfamiliarity with the interactive medium and has surfaced in many electronic democracy projects.
In 1994, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) sponsored both an electronic conference and a traditional inquiry on universal telecommunications service. The inquiry followed the standard method of notifying interested parties through the Federal Register and elicited 98 formal responses. The Internet-based virtual conference, however, engaged more than 10,000 participants in the policy debate over universal service. NTIA designated 78 public access points around the country for use by those who could not get onto the Internet any other way. It plans to issue a draft of the conference proceedings and a report in 1995.
Increasing Government Accountability. Telecommunications restores the link between citizens and their government by enabling people to observe the workings of government from their living rooms, get reams of candidate and government information at a single sitting, and see tax dollars at work with streamlined electronic service provision.
The California Channel is a window on institutions many Californians have never seen before, such as the state Supreme Court. The Channel, which offers cable subscribers extensive coverage of the state legislature, has begun experimenting with two-way feeds to allow citizens far from the state capitol to participate at hearings in Sacramento. It feeds state Assembly and Senate sessions to 4.2 million homes. A state version of C-SPAN, it was launched in 1986 with $1 million in funding from foundations, cable companies, and the state Assembly. The programming emphasizes committee hearings, covers oral arguments in the state Supreme Court, and combines the Assembly and Senate in one channel. Having pioneered interactive hearings in which citizens can participate and testify by telephone and video, the channel gives citizens a new direct perspective on state government processes, unfiltered by the political press corps.
Other states, such as Washington and New York, have instituted programs to put the legislature on television. And hundreds of communities across the country have local government channels on their cable system that allow residents to observe city council meetings, school board debates, and other government activities.
If knowledge is power, Congress is attempting to shift the balance of power to the public. In January 1995, the Library of Congress introduced "Thomas." This Internet-based system provides the full texts of the Congressional Record and bills introduced since 1993. It also offers access to the House and Senate’s Gopher servers, which have directories for lawmakers and committees, committee hearing schedules, floor schedules, and visitor information. Future materials to be offered include the Congressional Research Service’s Bill Digest, a file containing summaries and chronologies of legislation.
Across the country, states and counties are experimenting with electronic service delivery. Thirty percent of the people in Tulare County, California, are on welfare, one of the highest percentages in the United States. To save money, reduce errors, lower the time spent by welfare intake workers, and empower individuals, the County installed the "Tulare Touch." This $3.2 million combination of main-frame computer, laser-disk storage, and touch-screen technology saved $20 million in its first year. Using intake worker’s suggestions, the Tulare system guides welfare applicants through the application procedure—saving time, money, and dignity for all involved.
Enabling Advocacy. People are disenchanted with politics because they lack a voice—except at the polls. And they are distracted from democratic processes by the many demands of daily life.
The new telecommunications technologies offer the prospect of being heard—and just as important, of listening and watching what Mitch Kapor of the Electronic Frontier Foundation calls "50,000 C-SPANs." Electronic networks can assist in three distinct stages of advocacy: providing a voice to the disempowered, organizing far-flung constituencies, and waging campaigns.
Online computer conferences do not reveal the participants’ race, gender, or socioeconomic background, providing a forum for people who might not be heard otherwise. For instance, homeless people (at kiosks in public libraries), other residents (dialing in), and public officials (directly connected), engaged in a computer conference on Santa Monica’s Public Electronic Network (PEN). This online conference transcended geography, class, occupation, and appearance and might not have occurred if held in real time. Newspapers soon began to report on the conference, and homelessness became a hotly debated topic. Property owners met with the homeless in a face-to-face discussion. The homeless constituency reasserted its online statements that "showers, washers, and lockers" were basic necessities for a job search. The Santa Monica City Council responded by granting $150,000 for the "SHWASH LOCK" program— establishing these basic necessities in locations for use by the homeless.
Established in 1990, the 500-member Smoking Control Advocacy Resource Center Network (SCARCnet) is a private, nonprofit computer communications network with membership restricted to tobacco control advocates. Sponsored by the Advocacy Institute, SCARCnet provides daily smoking control updates and monthly action alerts. In addition, subscribers can send secure e-mail messages to other SCARCnet members, engage in online strategy discussions, and search tobacco control resources.
Communication with public officials, the goal of many advocacy campaigns, can be accomplished by direct e-mail campaigns. In 1994, the Clinton Administration proposed that telecommunications equipment manufacturers install computer chips into all their products that would allow the FBI, CIA, and the National Security Agency to eavesdrop on electronic communications. In response, Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPSR) mounted an electronic petition drive and electronic mail campaign. More than 47,000 people "signed" the electronic petition, presented in a 280-page document to Vice President Gore. Eventually, the Clipper Chip proposal, as it was called, was dropped. CPSR is in the process of writing a "how to" paper on electronic petitioning.
While e-mail can empower, it is a double-edged sword. The ease of sending large volumes of e-mail can also be used to deluge electronic networks with unwanted information or solicitations. This junk e-mail can saturate e-mail accounts and cause important issues to be overlooked. For instance, in 1994 an immigration law firm named Canter & Siegel sent solicitations for business to millions of people on the Internet. Despite the overwhelmingly negative reaction of Internet users, little could be done to stop the solicitations.
Voting. An October 1994 survey in Macworld, a respected computer magazine for Macintosh users, indicated electronic voting to be the single service that consumers most wanted from the NII. Currently, the lack of appropriate software and the inadequacy of the information infrastructure combine to make electronic voting prohibitively expensive. But the components of the necessary software continue to be developed, and the information infrastructure continues to be upgraded. Ed Weems, President of the Election Technology Company, estimates that the technology for voting by television could be available in 2 to 3 years, but the political resistance to such a system may postpone implementation by up to 15 years.
Despite the promise of electronic voting, it is far from clear whether this technology will increase turnout. Current cumbersome registration and voting procedures, which could be carried over into electronic voting systems, suppress voter turnout. And social barriers, such as limited information and citizen cynicism, cannot be combated by switching to electronic voting.
Community Empowerment. Perhaps the best, yet least measurable, way to increase citizen participation in governance is to foster community connections. Civic networks—geographically defined computer networks with dial-up access and, frequently, Internet connectivity—provide discussion groups on community issues ranging from high school sports to recreation tips to local politics in addition to providing Internet e-mail services and database access. Government and nonprofit services are often listed as well. These 21st century town halls bring all the democratic potential—information, deliberation, accountability, and advocacy—of telecommunications technologies under one roof.
The National Public Telecomputing Network (NPTN) promotes the establishment of Free-Nets around the country. A Free-Net is a nonprofit civic network affiliated with NPTN, accessible for little or no charge to the public. Currently there are 45 Free-Nets online and 121 organizing committees. Cleveland’s Free-Net is the largest, with 60,000 registered users and 100,000 logins a week. NPTN received a $450,000 grant from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) to extend the Free-Net model into rural areas.
In Iowa, the state underwrote the construction of a 3,000-mile fiber-optic network that provides service to 108 sites in all of Iowa’s 99 counties. One classroom in every county is connected to the Iowa Communication Network, allowing students, teachers, and administrators to participate in statewide teleconferences. Future plans are to link 300 additional schools and 100 libraries to the network, bringing Iowans closer together.
In Maryland, the state library system and state government have assumed the civic networking initiative. Maryland’s "Sailor Network" provides free Internet connections to all Maryland residents through the public library or the 192 dial-up lines reserved for such use. For personal e-mail accounts, the state charges a modest fee of just under $3 a month. The library system is able to offer this service through funds from the Department of Education’s Office of Educational Research and Improvement under the Library Services and Construction Act. With these funds expected to expire by September 1995, the library system plans on asking the Maryland legislature for close to $1 million for fiscal 1996.
The infrastructure and applications that foster community connection and democratic participation are advancing by leaps and bounds. But users are still experimenting with social protocols and electronic etiquette taken for granted in face-to-face discussion. Some lessons:
Ensure Broad-Based Access. Even today, as many as 10 percent of the people in the United States have no telephone service, and 35 percent have no cable television. And, according to a 1994 Census Bureau survey, only about 11 percent of U.S. households have a personal computer with a modem. It is imperative that people who do not have access today be included in the construction of a civic network from the beginning. Civic networks should encourage the provision of access points where they have the chance of engendering the greatest good. In addition to public offices and shopping malls, civic network access points should be placed in respected community locations like churches, the Salvation Army, boys’ and girls’ clubs, community youth centers, unemployment offices, and homeless shelters.
Foster Democracy, not Demagoguery. Benjamin Barber, a Rutgers University political scientist, urges a distinction between real and spurious electronic democracy, noting that "the new demagoguery is much more dangerous because it passes as more democratic." And Ted Becker, a political science professor at Auburn University, points out that the call-in shows and computer conferences staged by politicians might be packaged as electronic town meetings, but really offer only limited, highly structured options for input—candidate propaganda that can take advantage of voters’ interest in interactive communications.
Encourage Constructive Interaction. A formal structure helps ensure that the new connections between government and citizens are constructive. For example, Santa Monica’s PEN designer, Ken Phillips, concludes that opening the network to the general public without guidance can be counterproductive. Community leaders should help structure the network’s tone and demeanor, and system developers should include moderators in future networks.
Develop Partnerships. Groups committed to civic uses of technology have a relatively small voice compared to the large service providers—the Baby Bells, TCIs, and Time-Warners. By developing partnerships and common agendas, public interest groups can secure some public space for alternative voices. Nonprofits should develop a "toolbox" for policymakers that includes model laws and model contracts between public agencies and nonprofits.
Involve the Business Community, but Don’t Rely on It. Phillips believes the business community should be brought into community networks early. PEN excluded business from its development due to "paranoia about the system being commercialized." According to Phillips, not only does the business community deserve to be involved because of its integral role in communal life, but its participation will bring individual users to the system as well. But Tracy Westen, President of the Center for Governmental Studies and founder of the California Channel, warns of the lack of public-mindedness that can come from corporate control of programming.
Establish Sustained Funding. As Mario Morino argues in his "Assessment and Evolution of Community Networking," community networks must establish a funding base from fee-based services and sustained funding sources, most often locally based. Government and other grant money can be used to supplement this base, but a sustained funding model must not be dependent on grants. Community networks could find support in basic subscription charges, service charges, organizational and business fees, local subsidies linked to jurisdictional taxes or levies, and funders that commit to long-term funding.
Spread Information on What Works. Today’s experiments with electronic democracy show the possibilities for positive outcomes. But even the most successful projects continue to struggle for support and can become idiosyncratic given their focus on particular communities. And fledgling experiments in democracy continue to reinvent the wheel because there is no central resource available. A clearinghouse of information on electronic democracy initiatives, including information and analysis of outcomes, would improve everyone’s understanding of what works best.
The grassroots support for teledemocracy is there. According to a recent Benton Foundation poll, 76 percent of Americans believe companies that profit from the new telecommunications technologies should be required to dedicate part of their resources to community uses and community access to government information. Other recent national surveys—Macworld, October 1994, and Harris, October 1994—show that people want community information and educational resources, not more entertainment. These findings suggest strong support for a government mandate ensuring that the new media encourage noncommercial public uses.
But technical choices being made today can hold open—or foreclose—policy options tomorrow. That is why it’s important to identify the public policy priorities for the design of communications systems and the rules for its use. Will the NII be built with distributed, interactive switching —allowing citizens to send as well as receive messages and programming? Should policy-makers establish hardware and software standards for the construction of the NII, providing certainty and security to industry but risking obsolescence and inefficiency? Should citizens be allowed to send encoded messages that cannot be cracked by law enforcement agencies, or should industry be required to install mechanisms that facilitate eavesdropping in the interest of public safety? These questions will affect the prevalence, security, and use of the information infrastructure for community and democratic purposes—questions being asked and answered today, effectively hardwiring tomorrow’s services.
Appeal for the Technophobes. For some, the biggest barriers to electronic participation are not cost or access, but technological unfamiliarity. Although confusing interfaces, mismatched hardware and software, disorganized databases, and expensive training programs are daunting, there is progress on the user-friendliness front.
To provide training in the earliest stages of community and organizational networking, NCexChange—a statewide project to meet the electronic communications network needs of North Carolina nonprofit organizations—was awarded a grant from NTIA to develop a "new class of information professional, the community information broker." These brokers will be in multi-issue community-based organizations around the state, like the North Carolina Division of Community Assistance. They will also be in community development corporations, community action agencies, and libraries. Such brokers —trained librarians, AmeriCorps participants, computer enthusiasts, and others—will provide community networking assistance to organizations in designated North Carolina Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities.
A complementary training strategy is fostered by Playing to Win, a network of community computing centers in the New York, Boston, and Washington, D.C. areas, that began as a single community computing center in Harlem in 1983. Since then, the network has expanded to include 35 centers, with services including training for word processing and graphic design software. The network provides hardware and software resources, grant-writing assistance, and an association to bring community computing centers together.
Anyone who has tried to "surf the net" realizes that navigating through a universe of information with complicated UNIX commands is like trying to find India by heading west from Spain. One may discover valuable information, but it is often not what was wanted. The National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign has built a better sextant. Its Mosaic program allows seamless information retrieval from remote databases around the world. By incorporating a graphic interface and "point-and-click" technology, Mosaic foreshadows a generation of Internet-searching applications for people other than computer scientists.
Access for the Disenfranchised. With all-time-low voter turnouts and rising cynicism about elected officials and the democratic process, why should people suddenly get excited about the new opportunities for participatory democracy? In a word: voice. It is true, as Ralph Nader is quick to point out, that the promises of technological innovation for making democracy work have for the most part been unfulfilled—the great educational revolution predicted by boosters of broadcast television and, a generation later, the equally revolutionary paradigm shift in education promised by cable’s proponents. But Nader acknowledges the potential value of the NII in encouraging diversity and free access to all government databases by all people. And unlike broadcast and cable television, interactivity is a fundamental component of an effective NII.
New technologies can reinvigorate the political process, but if they remain expensive and complicated, they could widen the economic, social, geographic, and ethnic gulf between the represented and the underrepresented. The real costs associated with buying computers, modems, and software, installing high-capacity phone lines, maintaining online service accounts, and learning about the equipment prohibit the use of the information infrastructure for many people. But even though a computer in every home and a modem on every desk is not currently feasible, the combination of home computers and community computing centers can help ensure that the benefits of the NII go to all. There are some public policy and nonprofit solutions. For instance, lifeline funds—subsidized telephone hook-ups for low-income users—benefit individuals, while community computing centers provide a community location for technology training.
In Texas, the legislature approved a 25-percent discount on all telephony used for distance learning more than 50 percent of the time, helping schools to meet the telecommunications needs of their students and their communities. In Ohio, after months of litigation and negotiations, Ameritech, the leading provider of local telephone service in the Midwest, agreed to fund 14 community media centers in low-income neighborhoods, provide an $8 a month reduction in basic service charges to recipients of public assistance programs, and allow public assistance recipients to establish new phone service without a deposit or a service connection fee.
Even as individuals risk being left behind by the multiple costs of NII access, noncommercial information providers—advocacy groups, schools, artists, and others—risk being marginalized by corporate America’s perception that the NII will support only entertainment and consumer services. Some policymakers have begun to explore ways for noncommercial services to be supported by the NII. But with the current mood against public broadcasting in Congress, noncommercial information providers are not hopeful that federal help will be forthcoming.
Supporting Equitable Access in the New Environment. With competition rapidly replacing monopoly power in the telecommunications industry, a new debate about how to define and ensure universal service has begun. Regional telephone companies, in particular, are chafing under their traditional responsibilities as common carriers, and demanding that their competitors be required to help foot the bill for providing basic telecommunications service to all. This debate will unfold in Congress, the Federal Communications Commission, and state legislatures and regulatory commissions. Nonprofit groups need to be involved on all fronts.
In 1994, Senator Daniel Inouye, Chairman of the Senate Communications Subcommittee, introduced legislation that would have created a "public telecommunications infrastructure fund" to support access to advanced networks by nonprofit organizations, local governments, schools, and libraries. The bill also would have reserved 20 percent of advanced telecommunications networks for noncommercial uses. A much narrower approach emerged in the Senate in 1995. It focused on keeping access costs low for libraries, K-12 schools, and rural health care clinics.
Another proposal calls for a new universal service fund from a tax on the gross revenue of all telecommunications firms, including information service providers, cable firms, and telephone companies. This would support subsidies for lifeline access, emergency services, and telecommunications devices for the deaf, as well as public access and civic networking. This notion is being tested in Wisconsin, where telecommunications service providers contribute a small percentage of their gross revenue to a universal service foundation.
To adapt to constantly evolving technologies, universal service should be defined by service and access benchmarks rather than technology-specific standards. The 1986 Vermont Telecommunications Agreement was obsolete as soon as it was signed because it was tied to specific technologies, according to Barbara Grimes, Vermont’s Housing and Community Affairs commissioner and a former legislator. When the legislature drafted a new telecommunications statute, she refocused the debate onto what services and levels of service Vermont citizens should have access to and at what cost. Grimes complains, "My constituents demand sophisticated information services throughout Vermont, and it’s my job to bring those to them. However, I don’t want to have another head-end, fiber-optic, copper, ISDN conversation ever again in my life. I find it incredibly boring, incredibly confusing, and that’s not my job."
Franchise agreements for the provision of electronic services are a good tool to promote democratic applications of technology. As new technologies emerge and companies look for new markets, states and cities can rewrite communications services franchise agreements to guarantee that some capacity is set aside for public service uses.
What’s the private sector doing? The spread of cellular and mobile data communications, the rise of videoconferencing and worldwide electronic networking, the convergence of computers, broadcast and cable television, and telephony and its various components—all are driven largely by business and entertainment. And the priorities of the largest users and information-services providers could dominate efforts to reformulate telecommunications policy.
Potential rivals and partners, the telephone and television companies are scrambling to stake out the commercial turf of the NII. For instance, TCI, AT&T, and US West conducted a test in Colorado last year to compare the buy rate and costs of video-on-demand and near-video-on-demand, using a new viewer-controlled television remote control. The project provided only home entertainment services.
In addition to numerous opinion polls suggesting consumer indifference to interactive entertainment and retail services, early results of these projects again suggest lackluster enthusiasm for video-on-demand and home shopping. For instance, in TCI’s video-on-demand experiment in the Denver area, customers ordered just one movie per household every two weeks. It seems that consumers are much more willing to pay for true interactive services—services through which they can find, comment on, and produce information.
Ending in 1993, AT&T provided information services, video games, and home shopping over interactive television to 30 homes of AT&T employees in the Chicago area. AT&T concluded that there is no single irresistible consumer service. Instead, there are four characteristics in a successful interactive system: entertainment, transaction, communication, and information. For example, consumers will be more likely to support interactive television if, during the showing of a basketball game, they can buy tickets to upcoming games, send replays of spectacular dunks to friends, and check the won-lost record of the opposing team. It seems that there is a direct relationship between the level of interactivity and consumer interest.
What’s Government Doing? The National Information Infrastructure initiative made telecommunications a Presidential priority. The Administration is committed to wiring every clinic, library, and classroom to the NII before the end of the century.
Congress once again is working on legislation to allow head-to-head competition between the regional Bell telephone companies, long distance carriers, and cable television systems. But Washington DC is simply trying to catch up to state governments and the courts. A growing number of states already allow some sort of local telephone service competition. And several courts have ruled that the regional Bell companies can provide video services in direct competition with cable companies. Deregulation advocates contend that competition will bring lower rates, accelerate infrastructure construction, and foster increased use of the NII.
In September 1993, the White House formed the Information Infrastructure Task Force (IITF) to articulate and implement the Administration’s vision for the NII. The four committees —Information Policy, Telecommunications Policy, Applications and Technology, and NII Security Issues—oversee the numerous public policy issues raised by the construction of the NII.
FedWorld, an initiative of the Commerce Department’s National Technical Information Service, dramatically expanded the federal government information available online. Also, the White House and almost every Cabinet-level government agency has services accessible via Gopher and the World Wide Web on the Internet. The federal government has also begun to reverse a trend to sell government information to commercial information providers for resale. For example, a 1994 Office of Management and Budget directive required federal agencies to price information products at the cost of dissemination and to avoid practices that would restrict public access.
The NTIA awarded $24 million in fiscal year 1994 for nonprofits and state and local governments to devise telecommunications plans and to demonstrate applications in health, education, community service, and other uses of public interest. More than 1,000 applications totaling more than $500 million came in from all 50 states and the District of Columbia—signaling extraordinary demand for use of the NII. Of the 92 projects the NTIA funded, the greatest number (27) went to community information efforts, which garnered $7.4 million of the total funds. Before the 1994 elections, Congress budgeted another $64 million to support local planning and public-interest applications for fiscal year 1995. NTIA received more than 4,000 letters of intent for the second round of funding in 1995. But the new Republican majority, which has been moving to trim federal spending, is expected to decide on a lower figure for 1995.
What are Nonprofits Doing? While the private sector focuses on home shopping and 500 channels of television, and the government grapples with the issues of local telecommunications service deregulation, the nonprofit sector is beginning to articulate the need for universal service and noncommercial information services.
In March 1994, at the request of the Clinton Administration, the Benton Foundation convened the Public Interest Summit. Seven hundred representatives of nonprofit groups and foundations discussed telecommunications and universal access, public service delivery, economic development, community development, and democracy. This meeting demonstrated that all non-profit groups, from the Sierra Club to the Association of Junior Leagues, will be affected by the NII and must pay attention to the issues surrounding its construction.
At the local level, hundreds of nonprofits have initiated projects that fulfill democratic principles with funding from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting and NTIA. For instance, the Center for Neighborhood Technology in Chicago is investing nearly $1 million into a project to integrate recently released data on local home mortgages into a multivariate database depicting the health of individual Chicago neighborhoods. This project combats one of the most vexing difficulties of the NII—information overload. The Center will identify, organize, and integrate neighborhood data in a single user-friendly database, to be made available to the public and to nonprofits.
Another strategy may be for nonprofit groups to become more aggressive participants in the telecommunications marketplace. New York Law School Professor Allen Hammond says nonprofit groups and small businesses should form consortia to buy advanced telecommunications services. By pooling their purchasing power, they stand a better chance of obtaining the most advanced links to the information superhighway. "It’s not enough to say it’s right, it’s good, and we should do it," says Hammond. "You need allies."
Nonprofit groups also must recognize that they play an important role as information providers. "In an information society, nonprofits produce what everybody wants," argues Robert Loeb, President of the Telecommunications Cooperative Network. He urges nonprofits to become more aggressive about producing and marketing information in order to demonstrate that noncommercial uses of the information infrastructure are economically viable.
Despite some progress in community-building and information access, democracy advocates must remain vigilant. Oregon Connects, that state’s telecommunications strategy report, was dead once its legislative champion was voted out of office. And Maria Teresa Rojas, general manager of New York City’s municipal cable TV network, Crosswalks, says that the city’s Commission on Public Information and Communication expired due to lack of community or political support, despite being mandated in the 1989 revised City Charter.
One reason for limited political support is that new technologies may deepen democracy but also threaten the culture of incumbency. "Ultimately, we have serious political problems in how to structure new media in the best interest of participatory democracy," asserts Auburn’s Becker.
Despite political foot-dragging, though, electronic democracy is here to stay. With 32 million people already on the Internet and a growth rate of 10 percent a month (according to the Internet Society), politicians are figuring out ways to make electronic contact with citizens online. But will citizens be able to connect with one another?
It is not by chance that communication and community come from the same Latin root. Any system that enhances or denies our ability to learn from and talk to one another necessarily affects our social fabric. But strong public support is necessary to educate politicians about the societal impact of the NII, not just its impact on specific industries. If the information infrastructure is to support our nation’s democratic principles, a broad-based constituency must be educated and galvanized to tell the news media, public officials, and the telecommunications industry that the NII is about communication, not just consumption.
* Reprinted from Benton Foundtion, Communications Policy Project Briefing #4, "Telecommunications and Democracy" Washington, D.C., 1995.