Technological Evolution Gives Rise to Revolution of Control in Society

Much of the recent news involving the Internet--the Net’s connection to the Colorado school shootings, the FBI raids on computer hackers, the volatility of Internet stocks, the continuing debate about kids and cyber-porn--has begun to converge on one central theme: Who’s in control?

It’s therefore timely to read an excellent, balanced and thorough new book on the subject, titled “The Control Revolution: How the Internet Is Putting Individuals in Charge and Changing the World We Know,” by Andrew L. Shapiro (Public Affairs, Perseus Books, 1999). Shapiro is a 1st Amendment Fellow at New York University School of Law and director of Aspen Institute’s Internet Policy Project.

Shapiro, along with fellow author and writer David Shenk, coined the term “techno-realism” last year and helped launch that idea as middle ground between the extremes of techno-hype and techno-pessimism. His new book is a lengthy expression of techno-realist principles, celebrating both the liberating and democratic features of the Internet and raising flags about ominous efforts to limit and shape individual autonomy in cyberspace. He attempts to offer a middle ground between these two poles with a detailed set of recommendations for the future.

Fifteen years ago, before the current boom in the Internet’s popularity, the phrase “control revolution” meant something else. In 1986, James R. Beniger, a professor at USC’s Annenberg School of Communication, published his book, “The Control Revolution: Technological and Economic Origins of the Information Society” (Harvard University Press). Beniger’s work was a historical review of what may be the most important theme of the 20th century: how we developed machines and systems with goals and mechanisms to steer toward those goals.

The term “cybernetics,” coined by MIT professor Norbert Wiener and from which all our “cyber” words are derived, was adapted from the Greek word kybernautis, or helmsman, the steerer of a ship. Beniger showed how a massive technological revolution in machine-based systems transformed the world economy in this century, such as numerically controlled milling machines and lathes, communication systems and, of course, computers.

The control revolution that Beniger described is still underway, although by this point, it is largely mature and ubiquitous because of the near-universal use of computers. Beniger’s focus was on the development of technological systems as a means of controlling our environment.

Shapiro, however, addresses the problems we have in creating social mechanisms to control technology.

Shapiro believes that the real revolution of the Internet is a shift in control to individuals. “The real change set in motion by the Internet,” he writes, “may, in fact, be a control revolution, a vast transformation in who governs information, experience and resources. Increasingly, it seems that we will.”

However, he notes, “contrary to the claims of cyber-romantics, individual empowerment via technology is not inevitable. Rather, it faces predictable and unpredictable challenges. It will likely be defined by protracted struggle, a clash of values and a fragile reordering of the social landscape that could come undone at any time.”

The chief obstacle to individual control, Shapiro argues, is the countervailing desire for control by institutions, especially large institutions such as government and giant corporations.

“Politicians and companies extol the new individual control, yet act instinctively in ways that deprive us of it,” he writes. Shapiro cites advertising aimed at convincing consumers that they have control, a message he believes is illusory and deceptive.

Nevertheless, Shapiro recognizes that total freedom in cyberspace can lead to a feeling of loss of control as individuals attempt to manage and attenuate the effects of other individuals asserting their freedom. The problems are familiar: cyberporn, spam, nuisance hacking, bad information, breaches of “Netiquette” and even cyber-terrorism.

Shapiro’s general solution is somewhat novel. He advocates an increase in the influence of middlemen, or mediators, people who can help create a filtered, reasonable flow of information and who can help foster dialogue rather than the white noise of pure information.

This goes against the conventional wisdom that the days of middlemen are numbered, because of the phenomenon of “disintermediation,” or the ability of the Internet to establish direct connections between individuals and information sources, or between buyers and sellers.

Shapiro says, for example, that the role of editors and journalists should be more important in the Information Age, not less. People need trusted mediators or conduits of information more than ever.

He also argues for a recommitment to public space on the Internet, an idea he calls PublicNet, a concept in danger of being overwhelmed by online commerce. He wants a space for serendipity on the Net, a place to encounter unwelcome, unpopular or unanticipated ideas, in contrast with the commercial trend of narrowcasting, or tailoring one’s information to a limited range of interests.

Shapiro’s goals and ideas are welcome and stimulating, and his research to back up his arguments is thorough and admirable.

There’s just one thing missing in his book, a problem for which no one yet has a real solution. That is how to produce public, democratic and innovative change in the midst of a culture that is almost completely dominated by trivial, consumerist, entertaining and market-driven preoccupations. A corollary problem is how to break through our current money-driven politics and fetishism of the market to even get people to think about things being different.

Shapiro has done his job, as an intellectual thinking about the Internet, by providing us with some interesting ideas and strong arguments and in a balanced, grounded fashion. But, like so many others, he doesn’t offer much guidance about how to get from here to where he thinks we should go. In fact, in many ways, the sheer cacophony on the Internet may be part of the problem.

That’s one difficulty with calling any book about technology “The Control Revolution.” Most people feel they’re losing personal control, despite the interesting new features of the Internet or the fascinating capabilities we’re given by networked computers. That’s because the most important control revolution, one that would realign power in the social and political world, hasn’t happened yet.

*

Gary Chapman is director of the 21st Century Project at the University of Texas at Austin. He can be reached at gary.chapman@mail.utexas.edu.