Alex Budak

Note: I’m taking a class right now called “Network Technology and Society,” which is a wonderful, multidisciplinary look at the way in which technology affects society and vice-versa.  As part of the course, our Professor has asked us to do a weekly reflective post for the class blog based on a question that arises from readings and our discussions.  I figured I would start publishing my responses here, and would love to hear your thoughts as these are contentious — and fascinating — issues we are dealing with.

This week’s question: Is the internet apolitical?  Should it be?

I believe that the internet neither is, nor should be, apolitical.  My opinion shouldn’t come as much of a surprise though, as I’m currently studying for a Masters in Public Policy – not a Masters in Engineering.  This distinction – as I think Jordan would agree – informs my opinion on the matter greatly.

I respect builders.  In fact, in many ways I am a builder.  But, I stop short of the Engineer’s import placed on remaining value free.  Jordan, quoting Wolf, praises the engineer, who “above all others is qualified to solve the great vital problems of our municipalities.”  He continues on his own, “society values engineers because their idealism works and because they deal with observable forces of cause and effect…the engineering method – a grasp of material facts and laws – insures predictability and consistency in an uncertain world.” (Page 39).  I would argue, however, that, like many things, the internet is inherently political, and that we are better off treating it as such, rather than clinging to ideas of technology ordering everything. 

I think it’s important to remember that the internet, as it was originally developed, was established with the backing of the US department of defense, and was focused on simple communication.  The world wide web, later on, was focused on sharing academic papers among other like-minded academics.  What the internet has become today – an agglomeration of news, information, social networks, blogs, porn, videos, and more – better reflects society as a whole than a simple technological tool.  Therefore, not to sound too Hobbesian, but in our internet life, having a leviathan is better than living online in the absence of any control.

I don’t disagree with the sentiment that it would be nice to have an apolitical internet, but the sheer scope of it make it literally impossible.  Take, for example, spammers who clog up our inbox and take an otherwise extremely useful technology and lower its efficiency.  Last year the total amount of spam was dramatically reduced when law enforcement agencies found, shut down, and arrested the leaders of a major spamming company in San Jose, California.  While one could argue that the “market” would take care of spam — through blockers and other innovations (thus allowing the internet to remain apolitical) — in reality it is a losing battle.  Such is the case, as well, with online pornography.  In both cases, we as a society have made the judgements that a limit on freedom, in contorling spam and porn, creates more benefits to a society than harm.  In doing so, we have inherently made a value judgment that renders the internet – a series of tubes – political.  Additionally, the internet lowers the barriers to entry in so many ways, in that simply getting an online connection allows one to participate, give and take, and influence so many spheres of influence – far beyond the physical space which we, outside of our computers – might affect.  By being able, for example, to easily slander someone (such as was the case with Juicycampus.com), is far easier to do so, and, in many cases thanks to the internet’s ubiquity – far more effective than in life outside the ‘net. 

It is clear to me that the internet should not simply be governed by technology alone – rather, it is a political being and should be treated as such.  But then again, I’m a policy student, not a value-free engineer.