Posts Tagged ‘weinberger’

On Thursday, John McCain, the Republican candidate for President, unveiled his official policy position on technology and innovation. He has come under fire in recent months for his technological illiteracy, but the extent of his wrong-headedness was not clear until his campaign presented the policy. Like many issues, it differs drastically from Barack Obama’s positions which have been public for months. While I have written in the past that getting technology policy right is not just an issue of being in touch with America, it is essential to the modern economy, what have others to say about McCain’s approach?

First, let’s take a look at the Wall Street Journal, who I’ve criticized in the past for confusing the issue at hand. Their article on McCain’s policy lacks real balance and is essentially just rephrasing his policy without substantive critiques. But when you read technology experts, it is clear that they think McCain is woefully incorrect.

David Weinberger, one of the smartest philosophers on the meaning of the Internet, compiles a list of words you won’t find in McCain’s policy. He points out that McCain sees the Internet as a broadcast medium, not an interactive communicative tool.

Harvard computer science professor Harry Lewis says of the policy, “It’s mostly vague, aspirational statements, many of which are in flat contradiction with each other.”

Craig Newmark, founder of craigslist, has been a driving force behind making the net what it is today. He says in reaction to McCain’s positions, “Obama embraces the Internet as a means of cleaning Washington up, but McCain/Bush sees it as a threat which might make them accountable.”

Harold Feld, the tech policy wonk, calls the policy “a joke.”

David Isenberg, a Berkman fellow, says “to McCain, the Internet is yet another technology by which America can compete against the world.”

Former FCC Chairman, Reed Hundt, lists numerous problems.

Wharton Professor Kevin Werbach calls it a “non-plan.”

OneWebDay organizer and ICANN member, Susan Crawford, notes “This isn’t vision.  It’s more like a wistful memoir about times gone by.”

The list goes on, but it is important to note that these are the people who understand the Internet better than anyone. Many of them have been fundamentally involved in the development of the Internet. They are on the front lines, so to speak, and McCain is admittedly nowhere near them in expertise. If technology and innovation is something important to you, then the choice seems clear in November.

Update: Lessig weighs in via video.

Years ago, The Economist ran a special report on the Democratic Republic of the Congo which described the country as “the bleeding heart of Africa.” The description has stuck with me, even if it hasn’t resonated with Western media which typically pays very little attention to the enormous African nation which has seen civil war take more than 5 million lives in the past ten years. The scale of this conflict – more deaths than any other conflict since WWII – defies comprehension and the lack of reporting coming out of the DRC doesn’t help. In fact, because this conflict is so intractable, it makes it difficult for the media to pay any attention to it; it would simply take longer than CNN can afford to sufficiently explain.

Which is what made the recent attention paid to the DRC even more interesting. You see, the DRC is home to one of the largest National Parks in the world. Virunga National Park is a 2 million acre area in the eastern half of the country which borders Rwanda and Uganda. The park is home to many of the remaining mountain gorillas. The park also houses a number of rebel factions, including the FDLR which came about when fleeing Hutu militias from Rwanda teamed up with disaffected members of the Congolese army. In response, a Tutsi Congolese general, Laurent Nkunda, formed the CNDP which has fought, with the backing of Rwanda, the FDLR, turning the south of Virunga National Park into a bloody battlefield. Add to the mix a Congolese army which is known to commit atrocities as frequently as the CNDP and FDLR, and you can begin to understand the horror of the situation.

A situation which went mostly unreported for years. Then, last year, someone killed seven of the mountain gorillas in cold blood. It wasn’t poachers because the animals’ bodies were left untouched. The animals and humans had lived for years in cohabitation, so why were they killed? The answer, as you might expect, involved many rebels, black-market economies and the politics of a failed state.

Western media jumped on the case. The striking photographs of the magnificent slain animals and the desperate people of the Congo were splashed across TV screens and newspapers. Suddenly, America cared about the DR Congo.

As much as the death of those seven creatures is tragic, no one could think it is more tragic than the millions of displaced or murdered Congolese over the past ten years. Shouldn’t that have created an uproar? Shouldn’t that lead to lengthy investigative journalism or talk shows centered around the DRC?

Normatively, very few people, I think, would disagree. But the answer as to why it doesn’t happen is complicated, but I think it comes down to a “circle of not-caring”. David Weinberger, in his recent newsletter, took a look at this issue with the help of Ethan Zuckerman who spends much of his time working to correct media miscoverage. David’s question was why are Nigeria and Japan, countries whose populations are roughly equal, so disproportionately represented in Western media. His answer comes down to ninjas.

“One reason we care about Japan more than Nigeria (generally) is that Japan has a cool culture. We’ve heard about that culture because some Westerners wrote bestselling books about ninjas, and then Hollywood made ninja movies. Love them ninjas! Nigeria undoubtedly has something as cool as ninjas. Ok, something almost as cool as ninjas. If we had some blockblusters about the Nigerian equivalent of ninjas, we’d start to be interested Nigeria.”

Generally, the DR Congo suffers from the same problem that Nigeria does – it doesn’t have ninjas. To resonate with an audience, news must be reified. Ninjas make Japan concrete. Gorillas made the Congo concrete. We’ve all seen gorillas in movies, zoos or on the Discovery Channel. We’ve stood in awe of their size and power. The murder of a gorilla is shocking, both because they are huge animals and because it is unique. Uncomfortable as it is, rebel warfare and African strife are hard for the average American to separate or distinguish. Gorillas? Murdered? Well, that’s something everyone can understand.

The story was understandable. As Ethan wrote in his response to the Ninja Gap theory, in order to break the “circle of not-caring,” “tell good stories in a compelling way. And it wouldn’t hurt to throw a ninja or two in there while you’re at it.”

Mark Jenkins, one of my favorite journalists, did that in the most recent issue of National Geographic. His article, “Who Murdered the Virunga Gorillas” is part war-journalism, part environmental exposé. But more than anything, it is a compelling story about the often overlooked conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Charlie Rose, too, takes the time to understand the conflict and tells the story (albeit in a slightly less compelling manner).

However, has the creation of compelling stories (thanks to ninjas) helped? Has outside attention on the DRC resulted in progress towards stability and peace? Understandably, helping the Congo would be a lengthy journey involving many peace talks and much healing, but has this happened? It may be too soon, but it doesn’t seem like it. Does this mean the Ninja Gap theory is bunk? I don’t think so – the net effect is still probably positive. More people now know that the DRC is in trouble (and knowing it exists is probably new for some). This is a step in the right direction and hopefully the right people are paying attention now more than before.

[For a skeptical look at the Ninja Gap, check this out.]

David Weinberger, in an early essay for Publius explained that “Rules are norms that have failed.” In his reasoning, the majority of human action is not governed by explicit rules; instead, tacit governance – norms, conventions and expectations – dictate the appropriate behavior in most cases. Where explicit governance is needed, the norm based approach has failed. Roads need explicit speed limits to avoid people’s tendency to cause accidents. “The overwhelming preponderance on the Net of tacit governance over explicit is a sign of the Net’s depth, importance, humanity, health and success.”

This tacit governance is connected to the civic technologies extolled by Zittrain. Those technologies, like Wikipedia or the Internet, which require constant care and effort to be successful, rely on mix of tacit and explicit governance. On the one hand, the Internet Engineering Task Force decides through “rough consensus,” often by humming. On the other, Wikipedia has an extensive list of rules and policies (of which one is to “ignore all rules”).

This mix of governance strategies hints at an effort to capture the civic ethic which allows these technologies to avoid formal, external institutional rule-making. Partly as a result of a technopanic over online porn, the Communications Decency Act was passed to regulate online speech. Because badware is so pervasive, McAfee and Symantec have a tidy business of combating it. Both of these are purely explicit governance which can have numerous complications.

How do we govern the Internet and technologies in either purely tacit manners or through a mix which minimizes explicit rules? I think it comes back to the civic ethic which can motivate heroes like Ghandi or just a simple Wikipedian who deletes a malicious edit. The question, then, is how to capture this civic ethic and expand it to new fields? This is more than a technological question, but by designing the tools and understanding the motivations of civic engagers, we can seek to expand this.