Felix Stalder on Fri, 18 Sep 1998 18:32:39 +0200 (MET DST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
<nettime> Steve Cisler: Electronic Public Space in 1998 |
Electronic Public Space in 1998: Civic and Community Networks Copyright Steve Cisler 1998. <<cisler@pobox.com> On a summer evening in 1997, I was gazing down at the piazza in the center of Milan. Here, in the industrial center of Italy, there exists a place to meet, to eat, to stroll, to talk, to propagandize, to relax, and at the very edges there are places to sell and shop and to worship. It is the essence of a vibrant public space: open, accessible, multi-purpose, and supported by the public that makes use of it. My vantage point that evening was the veranda of the Milan city offices that overlooked the square. A group of us were attending the first meeting of the European Alliance for Community Networking. Many of us hoped that the electronic environments we were building would resemble in some ways the piazza of Milan, Italy. Here was one of the nerve centers of the global economy, able to maintain such a cohesive yet diverse environment, when other cities, including my own, San José, California ( "the capital of Silicon Valley"), are struggling for a center, a sense of identity, and purpose. In the midst of the forces of globalization, exemplified by the Internet, the local community networks are also searching for their own identity, a central theme common to all of them, as well as economic stability. Community networks are part of electronic public space. Some community networks provide dialup access to local information and to the Internet; others provide a social network to discuss local telecommunications issues and ways of working toward solutions that lead to economic development or use the online tools to carry out experimental projects. Many encourage the production of locally produced web material and databases or foster local discussions through systems such as local Usenet groups, FirstClass, Caucus computer conferencing, or regional mailing lists. The most numerous electronic public spaces are public access points in libraries, telecenters, neighborhood learning centers, youth organizations, museums, and community technology centers. Integrated into many networks and access locations are training programs to help the public make use of the equipment and networks. This hybridized online and physical space is a manifestation of the electronic commons. Electronic Commons The ideal of an electronic commons or public space is not new. Civic groups have struggled for control of radio spectrum and cable television channels and production equipment. The battle for low power community radio broadcasting is still being fought. In the United States the Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility hosted roundtables in 1992 and 1993 to discuss the concept of electronic public spaces in the digital age. This was a time when the Internet was breaking out of its research and academic origins to enter the consciousness of journalists, teachers, librarians, civic leaders, and the business community. 1993 was also a period when the Cleveland-based National Public Telecomputing Network had spread the gospel of the Free-Nets around North America and to other countries. Dozens had started up and were the only way that many citizens had access to the Internet. Very few people were making money off of the Internet. It was a great time to buy stock in Cisco. I wrote an <underline><color><param>0000,0000,00D4</param>essay</color></underline> in 1993 entitled "Community Networks: Building Electronic Greenbelts" to introduce the concept of locally controlled electronic communication systems in various cities and towns in the United States. Now, five years later, many of the community networks described in the essay have shut down, but others have taken hold in other towns. We do not have a reliable count of these systems, but most in the business believe that the number in the USA is about 200-300, the same now as in 1993. These changes and failures have taken place during a period of hypergrowth of Internet users and providers, but the rising tide did not cause all the yachts to rise at once. I want to reflect on the changes that are taking place in the online world as well as the physical places where people gather to gain access to the Internet and other digital information. The Internet: Systems of Isolated Craving? As the commercialization of the Internet has accelerated, it has presented a challenge for towns, villages, and neighborhoods and for the electronic community networks that have been formed in hundreds of areas around the U.S. and in other countries. On the one hand the Internet serves as a gateway to a huge warehouse of partially sorted information, entertainment and as a contact point for talent, for friends, for merchandise, and for digital artifacts that are not found locally. On the other hand, the Internet is having a corrosive effect on some local institutions and culture. Local bookstores are losing sales not only to large chains but also to the online stores including amazon.com which now has more than 1000 employees and is branching out into other retail fields. Local banks are closing in a wave of mergers and consolidation of branch services into automated kiosks and outlets in supermarkets, supplemented by online access. Auto dealers are competing with mega-merchants on the net. Microsoft has moved into real estate multiple listing services on the Web. Travel agents compete with electronic bucket shops and ticket auction houses as well as online sales by the airline web sites. The California state legislature has passed a ban on Internet taxes, and the Clinton administration also supports this decision. This could result in a loss of local revenue. For some businesses, the growth in electronic commerce has been beneficial. Not only do large businesses have access to new markets; small firms do as well. In Libby, Montana, a sculptor who signed up for access through Kootenet, the local Internet cooperative, began doing so much business over the Internet that he closed his studio that catered to the vacation traffic that passed by during the warmer months. Who benefits? There may be more wealth coming into the community, but another storefront has closed. Ron Rappaport of Zona Research speculates that the rise in online barter and auction systems are a threat to flea markets and garage sales, those events where people clean out their houses and on the weekend, put up for sale just about anything that a vacuum cleaner can't ingest. These sales serves as much as social events, as small market exchanges. Local economic development and community networks Some community networks are very suspicious of business, and some businesses, especially Internet service providers, are distrustful of non-profit organizations that offer some of the same services for free or at a greatly reduced rate. Business pressure on the city council in Salem, Oregon, forced the open.org community network to raise the subscription rate from $5 per month to $7 for unlimited PPP access to the Internet. In Eugene, Oregon, the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (our tax collectors) have challenged the right of a community network to sell low cost Internet access. This may escalate into a national crisis that will threaten the charitable status of many other community systems that provide similar services. Other community networks work well with the local ISP, like PrarieNet in Illinois, by avoiding offering competitive services such as PPP. Since 1996, many for-profit ventures have concentrated on local regions for city guides and services aimed at middle and upper income Internet users. The more significant ones are CitySearch, AOL's Digital Cities, Microsoft's Sidewalk, and countless efforts by local and chains of newspapers. Peter Krasilvosky recently issued a paper for the Markle Foundation that discusses options for community information systems to cooperate and co-exist with some of these commercial ventures. For some systems like Austin Free-Net, this cooperation seems to work. Many successful community systems are closely tied to the regional efforts at economic development. This is especially true in rural areas of the United States. I have visited two exemplary efforts in the past 12 months: Kootenet in Libby, Montana, and ACEnet in Athens, Ohio. Kootenet is an unofficial co-op that pays the highest price for a high speed T1 line (approximated 1.5 million bits per second) in the sparsely populated rural state, yet sells dialup access at below the U.S. average and has extended service far into the rural areas of Lincoln County. Spinoff programs are opening learning centers, using school facilities after hours. Most important of all, they have included all the parties in the conversations about the future of the network. They need more capacity in their network, and each part of the government and industry, as well as many citizens, are offering to help or to work together. <<www.kootenet.net> Some community networks are trying to integrate the needs of local small business with the power of the Internet. ACEnet, the Appalachian Center for Economic Networks in Athens, Ohio, makes use of the Southeast Ohio Region FreeNet to link microfirms and help them sell in high value markets, to help tie together small firms within a community, and to link up similar projects nationwide. Many of these are part of food production networks. In addition, ACEnet is training young people and women who were receiving government assistance to learn new skills in the microenterprises or in computer repair. This is a region that has a very high rate of unemployment, so this program stands out as one. where technology is well integrated with social and economic programs that are well suited to the area. In contrast, much of the selling and consuming on the Internet is between the individual and the firm, whether it involves the purchase of X-rated movies, discounted airline tickets, or an item obtained at an online auction. In the novel Mao II, Don DeLillo writes about "systems of isolated craving" which are supported by the "technology of consumer fulfillment" in which the Internet now plays a major role: to do more than sell to a customer. The Internet marketers want to bond with and cater to the customer by entertaining him, eliciting responses to questionnaires in exchange for prizes, by building up a profile of habits and purchases and demographic background and then aggregating that information with other habits collected by other firms. The individual is invited to join the communities of consumer interest (Nike, J. Peterman, Macintosh zealots, microbrew drinkers); they are courted, given a virtual home, and reinforced with coupons, gossip, insider news, and conversations with other brand loyalists. In most cases, the technical resources available to the companies and marketing firms greatly exceeds the local, grass roots efforts that are trying to "build community" by providing these pre-fab structures online. The more recent trend of companies funneling more and more resources into so-called "portals" or points of entry for the consumer to an array of information, entertainment, and product destinations means that these sites (Yahoo!, Excite, Alta-Vista, Disney, AOL, Wired) will be able to saturate the other media to advertise the benefits of heading for their particular URL. Space in the real world is being filled with ads just as screen space is. Even the rubber dividers supermarket shoppers use to separate their purchases on a conveyor belt from those of other people in line now carry advertisements. A number of community networks (and many other non-profit sites) are accepting banner ads as a way of staying afloat, or to become less dependent on grants and donations. In _Breaking Up America_ , Joseph Thurow argues that the social fragmentation evident in post-war America is accelerated by target marketing which encourages loyalty to products or just the web sites of companies with a dominant position online. The emphasis on these media "communities" will make the geographic communities less important, at least to those who are online. Without appropriate fora for inclusive conversations and debate, democracy is threatened. Those conversations that do take place will be within the confines of media worlds populated by people with similar tastes. Those who are working to spread their own community network in their town or country or region believe that the conversations and interactions should span economic and age differences and include groups that have traditionally not had equal access. Besides the local groups promoting this goal, national governments in Europe, South Africa, and North America are also promoting the goal of universal access. How important is universal access to the Internet? In some sectors of North American and European society there is a rate of connectivity to basic telephone services of more than 95%, but in other sectors and many rural areas as well as most of the developing world, the number of subscribers or even people who have any kind of access to a telephone, is extremely low. Even fewer are using the Internet (or have even heard of it.) One of the ways this problem is being solved locally is the establishment of local access places known by many names: telecenters, telestuygen (Sweden), cabinas públicas (Peru), telecottages (UK), Amic@s (Paraguay), community technology centers, digital clubhouses, networked learning centers (USA), and espaces numérisés (France). The International donor agencies are betting that these centers are the best way of bridging the growing gap between people, towns, and countries where some have affordable access for some and expensive or even no access for most of the other inhabitants. In writing about this topic for international librarians I described one of the more advanced sites, the Digital Clubhouse of Sunnyvale, California, in the heart of Silicon Valley: The Digital Clubhouse located in a shopping center in Sunnyvale, California, provides free training, access to the Internet, and courses on digital storytelling, using several dozen high end Macintosh and PC workstations. All of these have a fast connection to the Internet. They are working on some projects with the local public library, but most of their activity involves community organizations, especially those that would have trouble getting online or learning the advanced skills provided by the Clubhouse. Currently, young people are working with World War II veterans to tell their stories using new media. Digital Clubhouse strengths are the training staff, the strong emphasis on people meeting people at the center, and the interest taken by the high tech business community in Silicon Valley. This non-profit franchise model is being replicated in other U.S. states (Maryland and New York), and other countries have expressed interest in setting up their own. Community/Civic Networks and the Shortcomings of the Internet Everything is not on the Internet, but some writers and net devotees act as if it is, and that anyone not using the Internet is deprived, out of touch, off the grid, and not ready for the 21st century. Yet, thirty-nine percent of the American public has no intention of buying a computer, no matter how low the price. The Internet does not reflect the reality experienced by many Americans, but because of its attraction and importance to some sectors of society and to parts of the economy, local communities need to come to terms with the Internet, to help shape its content and to make it work better to reach the goals set by different institutions in the places we may call home. How can community networks provide some counterbalance to these trends and outlooks? If they understand the community they serve, they will be in touch with a wide range people and not just the clickerati but also the people not online, including those who would like to be but cannot afford it or who would like to sample it, and also those who see no compelling need to use computers. The community networker will help the local businesses and schools and service organizations understand the forces exerted by the Net. They will help facilitate discussions and meetings about the effects of the Internet and how through local action, community businesses and groups can harness its power to make the local community stronger. The Future for Community Networkers If we look at local initiatives and the current trends, there are various avenues community networkers should take: working to humanize some of the larger infrastructure projects by helping the proponents guide their efforts toward genuinely useful applications and understand the new technologies that vye for our attention and understanding. Many of the so-called "Smart" projects usually imply that broadband connectivity in a region or school leads to an intelligent workforce, brilliant students, and a well-connected citizenry. Usually these affect a rather small portion of the population in a geographic area. Public education campaigns, public access sites, and social networking are required to spread the benefits beyond the existing knowledge workers and early adaptors. This is our work. Community networkers can help put a human face on a technology that confuses some and repels others by showing how local problems can be managed by combining traditional problem solving skills with knowledge about the Internet. A group of Palo Alto citizens who had been meeting online and face-to-face for several years, held a city council candidates' night to allow the politicians hear different visions of the digital future and to tell the audience how they would use the fiber optic network that the city is installing. In September, 1997, citizens from all over France met in Parthenay, France, to learn from their experimetns in democracy and technology. These examples need to be commonplace, not the exception. Community networks need to work outside of their local service area too. In Minnesota, Missouri, and Michigan, as well as the province of British Columbia, there are regional associations. Charlotte's Web in North Carolina is doing outreach in the whole region. National organizations like Telecommunities Canada have been in place there for more years than in any other country, and the Association For Community Networking in the US will celebrate its first birthday in October 1998. They are struggling with the need for sustainable business models, useful models for project evaluation, and campaigns for greater public awareness. The European Alliance for Community Networking is working with the Telecities consortium of the EC. Both AFCN and EACN held conferences in July 1998 and are planning activities for the coming year. Another activity involves the use of community networks as bases for regional and even global organizing and interacting with those groups which do not own their own infrastructure. An example of this might be the groups that were opposed to the Multilater Agreement on Invenstment (MAI). While they used web sites to spread information, they could have also used community networks as a local anchor for a global effort. All of these efforts, national, regional, and international, need your interest and your support. By bringing your interests and talents in art, music, political activism, and technology you can diversify and strengthen the local groups and add to the collection of stories that demonstrate the usefulness of these citizen-based efforts. Articles and web sites: ACEnet, Athens, Ohio. http://www.seorf.ohiou.edu/~xx001/ Association For Community Networking. (AFCN). http://bcn.boulder.co.us/afcn Cisler, Steve. "Building Electronic Greenbelts". http://home.inreach.com/cisler/greenbelts.html Cisler, Steve. "Telecenters and Libraries" http://home.inreach.com/cisler/telecenters.htm Digital Clubhouse, Sunnyvale, California. http://www.digiclub.org European Alliance for Community Networking http://www.bcnet.upc.es/ecn98 and home.inreach.com/cisler/milan.html Kootenet, Libby, Montana. http://www.kootenet.net Krasilovsy, Peter. "Community Resources on the Web: Building Usage and Long-Term Viability," Project Report. Arlen Communications, 1998. http://www.markle.org (search on author) Krasilovsky, Peter. "Community Resources: Self-Sustaining Online Models". An Arlen Executive Briefing, July, 1998. http://www.markle.org (search on author Multilateral Agreement on Investment. http://darwin.bio.uci.edu/~sustain/issueguides/MAI/index.html OPEN, Salem, Oregon. http://www.open.org Palo Alto Fiber Backbone http://www.cpau.com/telecom/keyben.html Parthenay, France. Sept 1997 conference report. http://www.vecam.org/actes/english/parthengl.html Telecommunities Canada. http://www.tc.ca -----|||||---||||----|||||--------||||---- Les faits sont faits. http://www.fis.utoronto.ca/~stalder --- # distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@desk.nl and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/ contact: nettime-owner@desk.nl