Re: [TSCM-L] OFF TOPIC - World Wide Web

I came across this in the May 28, 2006 edition of the New York Times.
.................
"EDITORIAL OBSERVER

Why the Democratic Ethic of the World Wide Web May Be About to End

By Adam Cohen

The World Wide Web is the most democratic mass medium there has ever
been. Freedom of the press, as the saying  goes, belongs only to those
who own one. Radio and television are controlled by those rich enough
to buy a broadcast license. But anyone with an Internet-connected
computer can reach out to a potential audience of billions.

This democratic Web did not just happen. Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the
British computer scientist who invented the Web in 1989, envisioned a
platform on with everyone in the world could communicate on an equal
basis. But his vision is being threatened by telecommunications and
cable companies, and other Internet service providers, that want to
impose a new system of fees that could create a hierarchy of Web sites.
Major corporate sites would be able to pay the new fees, while
little-guy sites could be shut out.

Sir Tim, who keeps a low profile, has begun speaking out in favor of
'net neutrality,' rules requiring that all Web sites remain equal on
the Web. Corporations that stand to make billions if they can push
tiered pricing through have put together a slick lobbying and marketing
campaign. But Sir Tim and other supporters of net neutrality are
inspiring growing support from Internet users across the political
spectrum who are demanding that Congress preserve the Web in its
current form.

The Web, which Sir Tim invented as a scientist at CERN, the European
nuclear physics institute, is often confused with the Internet. But
like e-mail, the Web runs over the system of interconnected computer
networks known as the Internet. Sir Tim created the Web in a
decentralized way that allowed anyone with a computer to connect to it
and begin receiving and sending information.

That open architecture is what has allowed for the extraordinary growth
of Internet commerce and communication. Pierre Omidyar, a small-time
programmer working out of his home office, was able to set up an online
auction site that anyone in the world could reach - which become eBay.
The blogging phenomenon is possible because individuals can create Web
sites with the World Wide Web prefix, www, that can be seen by anyone
with Internet access.

Last year, the chief executive of what is now AT&T, sent shock waves
through cyberspace when he asked why Web  sites should be able to 'use
my pipes free.' Internet service providers would like to be able to
charge Web sites for access to their customers. Web sites that could
not pay the new fees would be accessible at a slower speed, or perhaps
not be accessible at all.

A tiered Internet poses a threat at many  levels. Service providers
could, for example, shut out Web sites whose politics they dislike.
Even if they did not discriminate on the basis of content, access fees
would automatically marginalize smaller, poorer Web sites.

Consider online video, which depends on the availability of
higher-speed connections. Internet users can now watch channels, like
BBC World, that are not available on their own cable systems, and they
have access to video blogs and Web sites like YouTube.com, where people
upload videos of their own creation. Under tiered pricing, Internet
users might be able to get videos only from major corporate channels.

Sir Tim expects that there are great Internet innovations yet to come,
many involving video. He believes that people at the scene of an
accident - or a political protests - will one day be able to take
pictures with their cellphones that could be pieced together to create
a three-dimensional image of what happened. That sort of innovation
could be blocked by fees for high-speed connections required to relay
video images.

The companies fighting net neutrality have been waging a misleading
campaign, with the slogan 'hands off the Internet,' that tries to look
like a grass-roots effort to protect the Internet in its current form.
What they actually favor is stopping the government from protecting the
Internet, so they can get their own hands on it.

But the other side of the debate has some large corporate backers too,
like Google and Microsoft, which could be hit by access fees since they
depend on the Internet service providers to put their sites on the Web.
It also has support from political groups of all persuasions. The
president of the Christian Coalition, which is allied with Moveon.org
on this issue,  recently asked, 'What if a cable company with a
pro-choice board of directors decides that it doesn't like a pro-life
organization using its high-speed network to encourage pro-life
activities?'

Forces favoring a no-fee Web have been gaining strength. One group,
Savetheinternet.com, says it has collected more than 700,000 signatures
on a petition. Last week, a bipartisan bill favoring net neutrality,
sponsored by James Sensenbrenner, a Republican of Wisconsin, and John
Conyers Jr., a Democrat of Michigan, won a surprising lopsided vote in
the House Judiciary Committee.

Sir Tim argues that service providers may be hurting themselves by
pushing for tiered pricing. The Internet's extraordinary growth has
been fueled by the limitless vistas the Web offers surfers, bloggers
and downloaders. Customers who are used to a robust, democratic Web may
not pay for one that is restricted to wealty corporate content
prividers.

'That's not what we call the Internet at all,' says Sir Tim. "That's
what we call cable TV.'"
..............................

The End

To all the American members of the List, Have a great Memorial Day.

Reg Curtis - VE9RWC


Received on Sat Mar 02 2024 - 00:57:22 CST