Association of Research Libraries; <http://www.arl.org/>EDUCAUSE; <http://www.educause.edu/>
    
CNI - Coalition for Networked Information; <http://www.cni.org/>
 
About CNI
Task Force Meetings
Conferences
Presentations and Publications
Projects
CNI Collaborations
Site Map
Google

www.cni.org
the web

Information about CNI RSS news feed.
 
cni-modernization: Ads, free market, nets

Ads, free market, nets

Peter Graham (psgraham@gandalf.rutgers.edu)
Wed, 10 Nov 93 17:10:46 EST 

Date: Wed, 10 Nov 93 17:10:46 EST
From: Peter Graham <psgraham@gandalf.rutgers.edu>
To: cni-modernization@cni.org
Subject: Ads, free market, nets
Message-Id: <CMM-RU.1.3.752969446.psgraham@gandalf.rutgers.edu>


Ron Barnette said,
>we accept the price of free
thought and expression, and welcome in to the electronic community
advertisers or anyone else.  There is simply no moral reason, short of
preventing harm, for regulating electronic freedom.<

Morality does appear in this argument.  In a free enterprise economy (a
capitalist economy) those with more resources can have more economic effect. 
To equate free expression with the ability to produce messages is to turn 
a blind eye to the fact that those who can pay for more will get more, do 
more, have more, etc.  There are various responses to that situation which 
have to do with morality--
	--the situation is OK and it's moral
	--the situation is inequitable so it's not moral.

I submit that there is a difference between free expression and advertising. 
The trick is to preserve the former while controlling the latter.  We can
argue about how to do that, but to say that the two are the same (or that 
the latter is simply and only an example of the former) is to make an error.  

Mencken is said to have created the slogan, "Freedom of the press is
guaranteed to those who own one."  It's a slogan, but its point is of use 
in this discussion.  

There are respectable European democracies which have controlled
advertising in certain venues without noticeable loss of the ability
of a population to find free means of expression.  (I'm thinking of
limitations of advertising on television, radio, public
transportation, and the like).  The shibboleth of the market economy
being the answer to all issues is a peculiarly American expression.
We're in a position to begin affecting how the network handles
expression, including advertising.  I think it is legitimate to say
that market forces won't do the job, and that we'd better plan for
what we can see coming.

(Parentheses:  I think Lunde is quite right about the cost to the
receiver needing to be taken into consideration; what right does an
advertiser have to incur my costs?  And Figallo's urging that we begin
to cost out actual net use makes sense to me as a means of
contributing to the discussion.  And I don't think discussions on
present newsgroups and peer-pressure modes of handling personal
advertising are either socially desirable in the long run or likely to
scale into national environments.)  --pg

Peter Graham   psgraham@gandalf.rutgers.edu   Rutgers University Libraries
169 College Ave., New Brunswick, NJ 08903 (908)932-5908; fax (908)932-5888

[CNI Home Page]