Interesting People mailing list archives
EFF Summary of Public Interest Summit
From: David Farber <farber () central cis upenn edu>
Date: Thu, 31 Mar 1994 21:13:50 -0500
EFF SUMMARY PUBLIC INTEREST SUMMIT: SHAPING THE NATIONAL INFORMATION INFRASTRUCTURE Hyatt Regency Hotel in Washington, DC MARCH 29, 1994 OPENING REMARKS Welcoming remarks were delivered by Andrew Blau from the Benton Foundation, who expressed gratitude to the program sponsors and planning committee. Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown delivered pre-taped opening remarks on video, because he was in Russia at the time of the conference. Secretary Brown, who chairs the Information Infrastructure Task Force (IITF), restated the Administration's commitment to universal service, emphasizing that no one should be left standing on the side of the road. PUBLIC INTEREST SUMMIT PANELS DELIVERING THE GOODS: MEETING PUBLIC NEEDS? Moderator: V. Lane Rawlins, President, Memphis State University C. Everett Koop, Senior Scholar, Koop Institute David Lytel, White House Office of Science and Technology Jean Armour Polly, NY State Research and Education Network Anthony Riddle, Chair, Alliance for Community Media Connie Stout, Director, Texas Education Network Patricia Waak, National Audubon Society This panel discussed the ways in which the National Information Infrastructure (NII) can improve education, health care, and the environment by enhancing communication and decisionmaking within communities, as well as within state, national, and international boundaries. There was strong consensus on the panel and from the floor that teaching people to use the tools is as important as building the tools. Choosing the right regulatory model is a difficult issue, but David Lytel said that the Clinton Administration is committed to making sure that citizens can be information producers, as well as information consumers. He stated that the challenge is to make sure that the NII becomes more than just a large pipe for television reruns and movies, home shopping, electronic games, and gambling. The architecture of the NII must guarantee that needs outside the commercial marketplace, including cultural and other public benefits, are met. A LINK INTO EVERY HOME: HOW, WHAT, AND WHEN? Moderator: Allen Hammond, Director, Communications Media Center, NY Law School Ron Binz, Director, Colorado Office of Consumer Counsel Mark Cooper, Director of Research, Consumer Federation of America Deborah Kaplan, Vice President, World Institute on Disability Robert Larson, President/General Manager, WTVS-Detroit Michael Nelson, White House Office of Science and Technology Andrew J. Schwartzman, Executive Director, Media Access Project The panel explored the challenges in applying the concept of universal service to the NII to ensure access for everyone. The panelists discussed universal service funding mechanisms, the role of government in supporting a diversity of voices, and the need for public interest advocacy before the Federal Communications Commission. Mike Nelson said that the Administration's model for the NII is the Internet, and its goals for universal service are to provide subsidies to enable open access for as many people as possible, to adopt pro-competitive policies, to require nondiscriminatory prices, to prohibit network providers from controlling information, and to enhance interoperability and interconnection requirements. Addressing the difference between the common carriage regime for telephone companies and the market/consumer model for the cable industry, Andrew Schwartzman argued for the common carriage model instead of the cable model, because the cable model is passive and connotes people receiving only limited services such as video-on-demand and home shopping. Common carriage would help NII users to be speakers as well as listeners, and producers as well as consumers. Ron Binz offered the phrase "Information Superhypeway" and cautioned that a fully competitive telecommunications industry is not right around the corner. The key decision, according to Binz, is whether to rely on taxing voice communications service to fund the NII. Binz also characterized as "industry propaganda" the view that subsidies should be provided to enable access for as many people as possible. Mark Cooper challenged the widely cited statistic that 93% of the population enjoys telephone service. Instead, he stated that the 7% "unsolution" is really closer to 30%, which includes individuals with disabilities and low incomes. He argued that those who cannot afford access to the NII will be assured access if everyone who can afford to use the NII is required to pay for it. Deborah Kaplan took the discussion beyond the issue of funding to the issue of access. She argued that the 7% of the population that is underserved is a product of the market model. There is no one-size-fits-all solution, and policy input from low-income people is essential. She raised the concern that access to the NII for disabled individuals may be uniquely difficult, especially if the NII architecture is modeled on voice-based telephone service. Schwartzman emphasized the First Amendment dimension of universal service, including artistic speech, and the need to protect against any form of censorship. Bob Larson explained how public broadcasting's role in promoting local service responsibilities and public service duties is a model for what the NII can do to marshall local resources. The NII could augment public broadcasting's efforts aimed at reducing violence and improving the well-being of young people. SPEECH BY VICE PRESIDENT AL GORE The Vice President was introduced by Peter Goldmark, President of The Rockefeller Foundation, who emphasized the historical role of the NII in charting the future of democracy. Vice President Gore stated the Administration's commitment to wiring every classroom, clinic, and library in the United States to the NII within the next five years. Every person will benefit from the NII. However, while we already have the technology, we do not yet have the infrastructure. The National Telecommunication and Information Adminstration in the Department of Commerce recently announced the availability of funding for some of the aspects of the NII and already have received 3,500 inquiries. Reforming telecommunications law is essential. Universal service means lower prices for everyone. Open access means receiving and sending information across the NII. The future will look like the Internet if we make sure the NII is open and accessible like the personal computer. Networked communities are consistent with our democratic form of government and distinguish it from communism and fascism. We need to increase access to government information to enhance community decisionmaking. We are increasing the availability of government information. SeniorNet is providing services to senior citizens. The Environmental Protection Agency's toxics release inventory is empowering citizens to ameliorate environmental hazards in their communities. HUD has begun to put information about fair housing and fair lending on the net. We can empower our representative democracy. People closest to the problems are the smartest about the solutions. BUILDING COMMUNITIES AND THE ECONOMY Moderator: Linda Tarr-Whelan, President and Exec. Dir., Center for Policy Alternatives Morton Bahr, President, Communications Workers of America Cushing Dolbeare, President, Low-Income Housing Coalition Thomas Kalil, National Economic Council for Science and Technology Anthony Pharr, Counsel, Office of Communication, United Church of Christ Diana Roose, Research Director, National Association of Working Women Randy Ross, Vice President, American Indian Telecommunications After brief introductory statements, the panelists discussed what the NII means for generating jobs and economic benefits. The goal is to use the NII to create better, high wage jobs. Development of information policy must make sure that the NII is a tool for community planning. Telecommuting will have an impact on the national economy by enabling people to live and work anywhere, including in other countries. We should use the technology that exists now in order to do the kind of planning needed to make sure the new technologies produce advances in our national economy. MAKING DEMOCRACY WORK Moderator: Sonia Jarvis, Exec. Dir., National Coalition for Black Voter Participation Brian Banks, Policy Research Action Group Jim Butler, Director, AARP/VOTE, American Association of Retired Persons Mitchell Kapor, Chair, Electronic Frontier Foundation Sally Katzen, Chair, Information Policy Committee, IITF Ralph Nader, Center for the Study of Responsive Law Nadine Strossen, ACLU This panel addressed whether the NII can support increased civic participation, free speech and assembly, and privacy. Brian Banks stressed the NII's ability to bring about a reconfiguration of hierarchies; enhanced citizen participation in the decision making process would be the most fundamental change. Jim Butler revisited the NII's potential for community development, educational opportunity, and access to government databases. Mitchell Kapor focused on the potential for achieving the Jeffersonian principles of individual liberty and decentralization. The Internet has enormous democratic potential, but it is not easy to use. The emphasis should be on the Internet and interactivity, not on the Information Superhighway and Hollywood reruns. Everyone should become hands-on, start learning and interacting, and ask for help when needed. The networks should be easy to use, but we cannot wait for a national handout. Sally Katzen stressed the goal of economic sustainable development. The government should not be solely responsible for the nation's information sytems. The toxics release inventory is a model that has worked well. Ralph Nader, who still uses a manual Underwood typewriter, questioned what all this new technology will do about such problems as violence in the schools. Will it just put more people into the Office of Management and Budget and lead to mega-billion dollar overselling of unused software? While there needs to be a window on government databases, there is not reason for them to be overprivatized or overmonopolized. Educational efforts, like liberal arts-type courses, could motivate people to participate. Nadine Strossen argued that the common carriage model is important to ensure universal access--but security and privacy are equally important. We have to make certain that there are no censorial controls over content. All of us must lobby for privacy protection -- and we must fight the clipper chip.
Current thread:
- EFF Summary of Public Interest Summit David Farber (Mar 31)