Bengfort.com

Leaving work this morning and talking on my mobile phone, Ben and I fell into the popular discussion topic of the times: the increasingly probable demise of the real, live newspaper object.  I’ve been hearing advertisements for an NPR show concerning the fading stars of both of Seattle’s daily newspapers.  One is most likely leaving this world; the other is retreating to try its fortunes in the virtual one.

Later that morning, as I snuggled up with my Sunday New York Times (a luxury at $5 and procured, as usual, from the drive-through Starbucks), I got to thinking about the future of news.  The newspaper has been bound up with America since before there was one.  Benjamin Franklin was submitting pseudonymous stories to his brother’s newspaper before he hit puberty.  Benedict Anderson’s brilliant and off-cited Imagined Communities discusses the ways in which newspapers have helped create the concept of a nation as we know it.  He writes, “[W]e have seen that the very conception of the newspaper implies the refraction of even ‘world events’ into a specific imagined world of vernacular readers; and also how important to that imagined community is an idea of steady, solid simultaneity through time.”  Print-capitalism, and its North American engine, the newspaper, melded large populations into ‘New Yorkers,’ ‘Pennsylvanians,’ and ‘Americans.’

So what will happen when Seattle’s two newspapers no longer make their inky presence known each morning?  I predict that something like the Huffington Post–essentially a multi-authored blog set up in a newspaper format–will arise to take their place, but only if there is a need.  The real question is the question of need.  And it may turn Anderson’s formula on its head: if there is a community, there will be a need for a binding force, which may well take the form of pixels instead of print.  So is there a community?  Or is the demise of the newspaper the result, not so much of the Internet and a poor economy, but of the fate of the community in America?

Piggybacking on Ben’s post about how the Obama administration may change information technology policy, I had a revelation yesterday of just how strong an impact new technology has had on my political involvement and engagement in the past year. For one, I have made several comments on political blogs, especially those dealing with China issues, and I’ve even wrote to website administers to take down comments that I thought were highly offensive. During the Tibet turmoil last Spring, I even sent a few strongly worded facebook messages to Chinese friends from Dickinson who I thought were extremely out of line in attacking the United States when their freedom to do so was something they took for granted. I’ve never really given voice to my political opinions before, but now its something that comes naturally in the age of twitter and blog comment sections.

Also I wouldn’t have been able to watch (listen rather) to the inauguration speech without new technology. Of course CCTV didn’t give a rat’s ass about the incoming president and didn’t have a single station even partially covering the inauguration. We thought that CCTV9 would at least show the speech, but no, the only thing on was a report on “When will Obama close Guantanamo?” Not having cable, HBO, or any premium channels, nor having internet that was fast enough for live streaming, Andy, I and the girls came up with a bootleg solution: listen to NPR’s full coverage online (which occurred in real time) while watching halting clips from CNN’s live streaming (muted of course) by connecting my lap top to the big screen. The video of course froze every five seconds and then re-buffered, but at least we got to see what Michelle Obama was wearing (so important).

All in all, I have to admit that I wouldn’t be as politically involved, especially in light of the fact that I live in a communist country that doesn’t condone the democratic process, without the use of new technology such as blogging, twitter and social networking sites.

It’s true these things make a difference!

Amidst all the fanfare of the inauguration of the 44th president, I’m sure that the same things on my mind are very similar to those on America’s: how is the new President going to implement or change Information Technology policy in the White House? After all, the White House has been a significant vehicle for change in the way society deals with IT ever since the founding fathers forgot to include freedom of the Internet in the constitution. Instead they left it to our first President to declare a Proclamation of [Network] Neutrality in 1793 to stop Europe from embroiling America in its [standardization] wars. From the Pony Express and the Telegraph to Email and Twitter, the administration’s most important decisions have always revolved around the creation and influence of information policy.

But with this historic election, America now has its first Google president, breaking the glass ceiling that has left social networks as second rate applications. Now any child, anywhere in this great country can grow up thinking to themselves: “I too can become president, if I leverage the Internet to provide a campaign strategy that is inclusive of all”. Ok- maybe that’s not what America is thinking about, but it is certainly one aspect of this inauguration that can’t be ignored.

Take for instance a widely reported news item concerning the inauguration: cell phone providers had to set up mobile towers in order to ensure network availability to the large crowds in the mall. This seemingly innocuous tidbit that is really meant to highlight the size of the crowd in D.C. really serves as a reminder at the importance of technology in the Obama campaign from start to president elect. YouTube presidential addresses, Twitter election results accurately predicting outcomes in states, 25% of Obama voters belonging to one of the many Obama social networks, Blackberries in the White House- what does this all mean? It means, that for the first time, America has an administration that can effectively use the tools of the Internet for social and political means, and hopefully that will bring an increased focus to the need for policy that governs the Internet.

Right now the Internet is the wild wild west. Its a great place, full of new and exciting things, and pioneers are flocking to the Gold Rush of millions of users and instant connectivity. The Internet has provided a platform of opportunity that is unprecedented in America, and it embodies the American dream- anyone can come, from nothing, and make something of themselves on the Internet. Unfortunately there are also bandits that make the Internet unsafe: privacy invasion, internet crime, and all manner of lowlife from spyware to spam. There are even inequalities and injustices that occur on the Internet: censorship, data gathering, and all manner of discrimination from bandwidth restrictions to the high entry costs of being connected. We now have a President who appears to understand these things, and we need the U.S. Marshals to come and create peace (but not the U.S. Army Cavalry!)

As the first 100 days begin, here is a list of the few things that I would like to see happen with Internet Policy:

The Emancipation Proclamation of the Internet:

The Internet should be free from ownership by anyone. Certainly it shouldn’t be controlled by any one company, and it shouldn’t be censored by any government.

Peace in the Middle East’s DNS Server:

Secretary Clinton: There is no UN commission on the Internet, but it brings the world closer than ever before; if freedom of speech is an unalienable human right, then so is the freedom to use the Internet.

Bandwidth for All:

In the 1920s there was the rural electrification project to bring electricity to the whole of America, now we need a rural connectivication project to ensure that everyone has high bandwidth access to the internet

An IEC: Internet Exchanges Commission:

We need to regulate wall street- we also need to regulate network providers, so that dirty dealing doesn’t hurt the little guy trapped in a two year contract…

The 11th Right: The Right to Privacy

Obviously this is a philosophical point that needs much discussion, and probably several supreme court cases, but there would be no such cases if we weren’t constitutionally given the right to privacy.

Specific Laws for Internet Crime:

Right now if you commit a crime on the Internet, it is usually a “misuse of computers”. We need to define exactly what is criminal on the Internet, child pornography should not be charged as simply child abuse, it is worse, but we don’t have the means to define what is done on the Internet as crimes. Also, who has jurisdiction, and where? Important questions that need to be answered.

These are just a few things that highlight just how much thought we must put into our use of computers in the future. We have a President who has proved his familiarity with these problems, and I’m looking forward to being tweeted with his solutions!

To read the news today is to wobble between two competing emotions — undeniable hope and overwhelming fear. We feel certain that the promise of America remains, but unsure as to how we might contribute.

Such a time calls for us to embrace powerful ideas and turn them into realities that are an investment in the future of our country. One such idea is the U.S. Public Service Academy. The Public Service Academy would, like the military academies, focus on producing graduates dedicated to service.

Rather than preparing its students for a military career, however, the Public Service Academy would prepare students for work in health care, law enforcement, emergency management and other public service careers at all levels of government.

As a graduate of the U.S. Naval Academy, I know firsthand the power such an institution has to bring together Americans of a variety of backgrounds and beliefs and give them the tools to lead with creativity and intelligence. As a Truman Scholar, I know firsthand the strength of conviction of my generation and its dedication to the ideal of public service. This is an idea whose time has come.

The academy is more than just an idea, however—bills have been introduced in both houses of Congress. Currently, there are 24 co-sponsors of the bill in the Senate and 123 in the House, drawn from both parties and excited enough to state publicly their support for a national institution dedicated to producing the next generation of civic leaders.

I urge all North Dakotans to write or call Sen. Dorgan, Sen. Conrad, and Rep. Pomeroy to encourage them to join together in support of the U.S. Public Service Academy. For more information, visit www.uspublicserviceacademy.org.