***  Haus der Kulturen der Welt: Forum1 Archive  ***
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
   [Date]: Tue, 7 Dec 1999 16:48:53 -0500
   [From]: "Tim Bigelow" <tim_bigelow@icaf.org>
     [To]: "Cultural Exchange via Internet" <forum1@hkw.kbx.de>
[Subject]: Internet/TV access

Very interesting discussion.  I offer my own comments for whatever they are
worth.

As noted, TV and the internet are both similar and different, although for
some purposes they may merge together.  An unfortunate similarity, so aptly
identified by others, is their fervent pursuit of the "lowest common
denominator."  Not that there aren't good TV programs and websites
available, but in my opinion these are relatively few and far between.

However, that leads to a critical issue - who is qualified to separate
"good" from "bad"?  Not I, certainly.  Therefore, as a lesser of evils,
freedom of (even bad, hurtful) speech is worth defending, and the
alternative of censorship (however well-intentioned) is worth opposing.  The
answer (as in so many areas of life) lies in education and in encouraging
(but not forcing) people to make "good" choices.  That was true before the
emergence of the internet and it's still true.

The hope of the internet (in my mind) was (and to some extent still is) its
pluralistic, multicultural possibilities, something that cannot fairly be
said about TV, radio, newspapers, the publishing industry, the music
industry, etc., where control is well-entrenched in (a few very powerful)
corporate hands.  Yes, TV now has plenty of variety (on narrowcast cable TV
one can apparently watch golf being played 24 hours/day) but precious little
diversity.  Others in this forum rightly recognize that the internet seems
to be moving in the wrong direction - back to corporate control and the
lowest common denominator - actually accelerating the ongoing process of a
loss of (genuine) diversity.  In that sense, improved access to the internet
may well be a mixed blessing, but I would still oppose imposing government
restrictions or censorship.

It remains to be seen what can be done, if anything, to stem the tide, but I
remain hopeful.  One obvious possibility (which cannot be my original idea)
would be to separate the commercial uses of the internet from non-commercial
uses through some filtering mechanism.  Let the shoppers shop and let the
rest of us alone - may provide the basis of a "movement."   Also, I would
guess that high-quality language translation will be available to internet
users long before they all (are forced out of necessity to) learn English.
Finally, there are individuals and organizations that are (however
imperfectly) encouraging cultural diversity, much as other groups are
working to preserve biological diversity.  Their efforts should be
encouraged.

Tim