The Century Divide: Law-Makers and the Internets
There's an idea I've been kicking around in my head for a couple of months. Unlike many of my ideas, I feel like it is feasible, and that I could even help make it happen.
As was well illustrated by Ted Stevens' description of the Internet as "a series of tubes" a few years back, many people in a position to make decisions about technology do not know much about technology. Legislators and judicators alike tend to be older, and it is a case of 20th century knowledge functioning in the 21st century. As a group, they're also shockingly unfamiliar with the basic issues underlying discussions about things digital media rights and net neutrality. Regardless of all of this, we rely on them to make decisions about computers and the internet on a regular basis.
This matters. This matters a lot. For lawmakers in particular, any void in their information will be filled by lobbyists. As lobbyists are a group noted for not caring about the accuracy of what they tell important and powerful people, unless of course accurate information might accidentally help their case. As someone who is increasingly disturbed to see the effect of misinformation as on important national debates, I've been puzzling over this problem for some time. I think there is an answer, albeit one that requires an acknowledgment of the problem.
Education.
Even though I am sure that politics is sometimes dominated by people who hate being told they don't already know everything, I think this has a chance. Finding a non-partisan and qualified group of people to teach classes for local legislators would not be too hard, even if they would probably be donating their time. Getting the actual P.I.P* to attend is probably trickier, but if even a few are persuaded and go on to demonstrate their superior knowledge to their colleagues then I think it could catch on. Using a model similar to judicial conferences, which meet yearly and inform judges about important changes in law and procedures, I think it could make a huge impact over time.
Obviously, this concept is still in the half-baked stage. I do have some political contacts, and I need to sit down and talk with some of them and garner their opinions. While I'm at it, I might as well garner y'all's. What do you think is needed to make this idea workable? I'm sure there's plenty that I haven't thought about yet.
*People In Power. I like a good acronym, don't you?
- Matthew Z Wood's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Blog entry of interest
Hi Matthew,
I wrote a blog entry about this a few years ago that you might be interested in perusing: http://www.hastac.org/blogs/jonathantarr/my-blog-title
On the political front, quite a bit has changed since September 2007, when I authored that blog; the FCC is perhaps more consumer-friendly (or maybe just less consumer-hostile), Ted Stevens is no longer in the Senate, etc. But I still think there's a great need for something like you describe. I have to qualify that I have no political chops but perhaps you'd be best served by targeting particular pols, like key Congressional committee chairs and political appointees in important agencies like the FCC. Finally, maybe you can align this effort with others that the White House is targeting, like the open government initiative. I hope you'll share with the HASTAC Scholars community about what you learn as you continue to work on this project.
Thanks Jonathon. I'm thinking
Thanks Jonathon. I'm thinking about trying to organize this on a state and local government level for starters, as my family has a history in North Carolina politics. I've never once exploited this fact, but I figure this is a good enough cause to make an exception to that rule. However, you are right that it never hurts to be ambitious. If people aren't aware of what I'm trying to do, then it's pretty much a vanity project.
Of course, what I really need to make this work are teachers and a curriculum. I'd really love to see some thoughts on that.