Date: Thu, 21 Mar 1996 13:40:53 -0800 (PST) From: "Michael Strangelove" <michael@strangelove.com> To: Multiple recipients of list <cda96-l@willamette.edu> Subject: Essay: Political-economy of the Internet Here are the first few paragraphs from an essay on the relationship between of freedom of speech on the Net and the "statehood" of cyberspace. I am trying to define the role of values (ethics) in the new culture of online speech and am searching for sources/theories that will help explain the new value system of the Net within the larger context of global media culture. For the complete text of this essay, send the command GET POLITICS in the SUBJECT line of an e-mail message to Michael@Strangelove.Com Michael Strangelove The Political Economy of the Internet (Previously published in The Internet Business Journal, http://www.phoenix.ca/sie) -- Revised -- March 12, 1996 Copyright (C) 1996, Michael Strangelove. All Rights Reserved. Comments to the author at Michael@Strangelove.Com This document may be forwarded and archived on the Internet, so long as no changes are made to the text, Publishers take note, this draft is part of a book on freedom and speech and the Internet which I am working on -- contact michael@strangelove.com for table of contents (for publishers only). Introduction "There is a growing concern that the very existence of the Internet is a threat to the nation-state" (Globe and Mail, Feb 3/96, p. A1). Recently, the headline "Nations see Internet as threat to security" appeared on the front page of Canada's national daily newspaper, The Globe and Mail. Consider for a moment that more than two decades after its "invention" and three years after its integration into popular culture and the business process, the Internet has distinguished itself on two fronts. It remains the only mass media system to escape monopolistic ownership by media conglomerates (with no sign of this changing) and it is increasingly seen, correctly, as a threat to national security and sovereignty. Meanwhile, the business community throughout the world is gradually integrating the Internet into the core of its communication and marketing infrastructure. The inevitable outcome of these trends is that the communication infrastructure (including marketing, customer service, and financial transactions) of the business community is destined to conflict with the information policies of governments. One way of looking at the Internet is to understand it as an emerging nation-state, a state that, with each passing day, becomes more entwined with the fabric of the geo- political balance of power. The corporate world, particularly multinational corporations, and governments are soon going to have to come to terms with the statehood of the Internet. Political theorist Anthony Giddons writes that "significant power, within any type of organization, consists in the capacity to determine or shape policy." This understanding of power -- policy making -- is one that any manager, executive, or bureaucrat can certainly appreciate. Power-as-policy-making sheds light on the type of power the Net, (and more comprehensively, cyberspace,) wields. More precisely, the statehood of the Net is founded on its power to deny existing nations any concrete method to exercise direct, unilateral influence over the "policy" of the Internet. It is quite clear that, congressional saber-rattling aside, no nation has successfully legislated the information policy of the Internet. As a landless nation-state, the Net's constitution, or bill of rights, is its internal information policy -- no one group, community, ideology or nation is universally recognized to have the right to determine what values, art forms, beliefs, or private thoughts can or cannot be expressed on the Net. While this information policy is framed by pre- existing international treaties concerning copyright, thus far this unwritten but very real policy has not been further defined or amended by any individual nation's internal moral standards or legislature. Bear in mind that no significant content has ever been removed from the Net as a result of any one nation's information-policy making process. Indeed, just the opposite is the case -- every attempt at censoring content on the Net has lead to increased exposure of the censored or banned content and its further proliferation throughout the Net. Admittedly, it is theoretically possible for a government to censor material on Internet servers within its borders. Yet all previous attempts at doing so have simply resulted in the censored material migrating to the Net servers of other nations and remaining accessible via the Net to all. The dynamic of regional censorship being undermined by the international Net community is now almost a daily occurrence. This "end of censorship" in the international information sphere is not threatened by the possibility of a global information policy trade agreement on censorship. Any attempt to impose the freedom of speech standards of one nation on another will certainly be interpreted as a violation of national sovereignty. As a new form of borderless state, Cspace (Internet/cyberspace) has demonstrated sovereign power over its internal information policy. The front pages of newspapers around the world are demonstrating a growing awareness of this new political animal. But neither the global body politic nor the corporate realm have come to terms with the extent of the Net's sovereignty and the future impact of this "new wired world order". For the complete text of this essay, send the command GET POLITICS in the SUBJECT line of an e-mail message to Michael@Strangelove.Com