The Digital Society Project is a two-year research and advocacy collaboration between national and local groups with two, interlocking objectives. It is an effort to analyze the powerful technological changes radiating from the computer and communications industries that are reshaping the American economy, communities, and culture. It uses the analysis to help activists in the consumer, minority and civil rights communities formulate and implement policies to ensure that their members and communities participate and benefit fully from the transformation. This project is organized by the Consumer Federation of America in conjunction with Consumers Union, the Center for Media Education, the Media Access Project and People for Better TV at the national level and over a dozen lead groups at the local level, including the New York Public Interest Research Group (NYPIRG). It is funded by the Ford and OSI foundations.

The Digital Society Project examines the potential of the "information society," the problems that could prevent full realization of that potential, the effect on populations that fail to transition successfully into the digital age, and measures that can be implemented to ensure broad inclusion of all socio-economic and cultural groups in the digital society. The driving force behind this powerful dynamic of change is the convergence of computers, communications and entertainment media in the past several decades. This convergence has culminated in a new medium--broadband Internet services--that may soon displace traditional telephone, cable television, broadcast and narrowband Internet services by offering the consumer everything that TVs, telephones and computers can do, plus much more.

The impact of these technological changes is frequently compared to the industrial revolution of the late 19th century. This "industrial revolution" was built on the first uses of electricity, telecommunications, the internal combustion engine, and assembly line production. Those technologies massively shifted the contours of the economy, the location and nature of work, created an entire new epoch in the communications media, transformed American politics and gave rise to what some have called "the American Century." The Internet has already begun to transformour society on a similar scale at the start of the "Internet Century."

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES AND POTENTIAL PROBLEMS IN A TECHNOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC REVOLUTION

The digital economy has created a huge increase in economic wealth. At the same time, it has kindled the first round of major economic protests in over a decade (the World Bank/IMF demonstrations in Seattle and Washington D.C. and elsewhere around the world). Unquestionably, the transformation of the economy and communications is producing many positive benefits for many segments of society, but there may be unintended consequences in this transformation and groups that may become marginalized by the process. These effects demand a watchful eye and proactive people willing to take action and ensure that the benefits of these dramatic increases in prosperity and productivity are shared as broadly as possible.

The Digital Transformation and The Digital Divide - How do current uses of these technologies impact the economy, culture, and community? What is the potential for beneficial uses of information technologies? Is this transformation of society widening the gap between haves and have nots, where technological illiteracy excludes low-income populations from certain employment? Is it alleviating existing divisions in society or making them worse? How can technological have nots become engines of the digital revolution, rather than victims of its quickening march?

The Closing of the Next Net: Attempts to Control the Internet to Serve Business Interests - Are powerful economic actors gaining monopoly control over information pipelines and operating them in a closed fashion that harms consumers or limits the rights of citizens? How can local activists help to ensure competition for open, next generation Internet services in their area?

Privilege, Power and the Public Interest - How has the public been compensated for the regulatory benefits and use of public space provided to the communications industries? What legal and regulatory privileges have these industries enjoyed? Should the expansion of capacity and the potential intrusiveness of digital, interactive television create greater obligations to promote the public interest, including commitments to ensure diversity, promote broad civic discourse, and access to communications? Does the expanding power of the new media trigger the need for enhanced oversight and consumer protection?

A POSITIVE AGENDA FOR DIGITAL SOCIETY

The debates over the digital divide, open access and public interest obligations are driven by fundamental values in American society. The project approaches these issues with the assumption that Americans would find a worsening digital divide, closed information networks or a refusal by commercial media interests to shoulder public interest obligations troubling. Of equal importance, the project is founded on the belief that people can define the type of society in which they want to live. The direction of social change is not predetermined or inevitable. Within broad limits, technology deployment, economic activity, social interaction and political institutions can be directed toward specific goals.

• The positive objectives are grounded in the long-standing principles and policies of these groups. A digital divide, closed access, or irresponsible commercial use of the new medium are contrary to the values we hope to achieve in society because it suggests that people are switched off, denied economic opportunity, social involvement or political participation. The goals for active policy are defined by a consistent set of objectives across society.
• Technology should be open, facilitating access to the means of production and communications. People must control the dominant digital technology, not just use it.
  
• The economy should create not only wealth (or efficiency) but material well-being for its members and distribute material things equitably, striving toward equality. People must own or at least actively manage productive processes, not just be employed by them.
  
• Social structure should create personal autonomy, protecting the privacy and self-respect of individuals and facilitating meaningful interaction between people. People must build social institutions not just belong to them. They should define and preserve the uniqueness of their culture.
  
• The polity should empower people through participation in decision making to set the rules that govern their behavior. People should command political institutions, not just participate in them.

Specific policy objectives can also be identified.

• Influence the speed and direction of technological change to ensure an equitable distribution of economic opportunities through incentives targeted at individuals that enhance their ability to use and acquire the technologies.
  
• Protect freedom of speech and open communications by requiring non-discriminatory access to the new communications networks.
  
• Require a part of the immense wealth and communications capacity being created by the new economy be set aside for basic needs and civic purposes.
  
• Impose safeguards on interactive networks to ensure that consumers control their private information.
  
• Enhance consumer protection from abuse of a new form of advertising -- "direct mail on steroids" -- that uses personal information to target consumers and seeks instantaneous impulse buying through one-click purchases executed by electronic signatures.

DIRECTING CHANGE THROUGH GRASS ROOTS ACTIVISM

Using technology, being employed, belonging to society, participating in the political process are the first steps, because they embody the basic skills necessary to function in the digital society, but they are only first steps. Those who control, own, define and command social institutions capture the best opportunities, define social and cultural values and wield power. In order to accomplish these goals people must identify the key institutions through which society is defined, devoting their greatest attention to the Internet, the media (particularly television), to gain the skills and garner the resources that are necessary to participate in, influence and lead them.

This is a huge agenda that reflects the deep and pervasive changes taking place in American society. It would be a grave mistake to assume that because these are big issues, they will all be decided at the federal level for two reasons.

First, many of the battles of the global economy will be fought at the local level. Ultimately, e-commerce has to deliver the goods by traversing the "last mile" of distribution systems or the first mile of connectivity. In many respects, no matter how global the economy becomes, the quality of life is defined at the local level, in the space where people actually live. One of the key battles is to preserve the power of people to make the decisions that affect their lives locally.

Second, even if these prove to be federal issues, in order for consumers, minorities, low income and civil rights interests to be heard at the federal level, they must make their presence felt at the local level. Local grass roots activism is what offsets the vast financial resources that industries wield at the federal level. Consumer-friendly outcomes start at the grass roots with ordinary citizens expressing their feelings to policymakers about the kind of society that they want to live in. Regardless of where decisions are made, the better ordinary citizens understand the changes taking place in society, the more effective they will be in expressing their feelings and defending their interests. The ultimate objective of the project is to educate people about digital society, specify the policies that can direct change toward their desired social goals, and identify action to promote those policies.

• Informing consumer advocates, low income and minority groups and civil rights activists about these forces is the first step to mobilizing their constituencies to ensure that the changes affect them positively. Groups will
  Receive training through local forums and ongoing interaction with the national resource center;
  
• mobilize to influence public policy by interacting with the press and seeking to influence editorial policy (in print, audio, TV and electronic media);
• testify in hearings and formal proceedings that adopt rules and laws relevant their locality, e.g. in the transfer or renewal of the local cable TV franchises, and in the assessment of local broadcast licenses;
  
• participate in the national policy debate by joining in federal rulemakings on open access or changes in the public interest obligations of local broadcasters.

For more information about your local Digital Society Project, contact your campus NYPIRG office. NYPIRG is sponsoring a Digital Society Forum in New York City to discuss and explore these issues. Register Now!

NYPIRG's
Digital Society Forum
Wednesday, May 2, 2001 at 1pm
Empire State Building, Room 2925
350 Fifth Avenue (between 33rd and 34th Street)
New York, NY 10118