elpais.com
Internet for the People": A Critique of Current Infrastructure and a Call for Democratic Alternatives
Ben Tarnoff's "Internet for the People" critiques the current internet's oligopolistic structure, advocating for community-owned networks as a more democratic alternative, citing examples like North Dakota's rural cooperatives and Guifi.net in Catalonia to illustrate the feasibility and benefits of this approach.
- What are the key problems with the current internet infrastructure, and how do they impact democratic participation?
- Ben Tarnoff's book, "Internet for the People," examines the historical evolution of the internet, focusing on infrastructure ownership and its impact on accessibility and democratic participation. It critiques the current oligopolistic model dominated by tech giants, highlighting high costs and poor service in the US, contrasting this with community-owned networks offering superior service at lower costs.
- How do community-owned internet networks offer a viable alternative to the dominant oligopolistic model, and what are their key advantages?
- The book advocates for community-owned and democratically governed internet networks as alternatives to the current model. Examples such as rural cooperatives in North Dakota and Guifi.net in Catalonia demonstrate the feasibility and benefits of this approach, including increased speed, lower costs, and enhanced democratic participation. Tarnoff argues that ensuring universal access is fundamental to modern democracy, requiring both resources for autonomous living and meaningful participation in decision-making processes.
- What role can government regulation and public policy play in promoting the development and adoption of more democratic and equitable internet infrastructures?
- Tarnoff's analysis suggests that addressing internet issues requires not only technological solutions but also a fundamental shift in values and governance. He emphasizes the importance of revitalizing civic engagement and community building to support the development and adoption of alternative, democratically-governed online spaces. Governmental policies could play a crucial role in fostering these alternatives by providing resources and redirecting funds from large corporations.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing consistently emphasizes the negative aspects of the current internet landscape and the potential benefits of community-owned networks. While this is understandable given the interview's focus, a more balanced presentation acknowledging the successes and positive aspects of existing internet infrastructure could enhance objectivity. The repeated use of terms like "oligopoly," "monopolistic," and "desolador" (desolate) contributes to this framing.
Language Bias
The language used is generally neutral, but certain word choices, like repeatedly describing the current internet situation as "desolador" or highlighting the negative aspects of large tech companies, could subtly influence reader perception. Using more neutral terms like "challenging" or "problematic" in place of stronger, negatively charged words, would improve objectivity.
Bias by Omission
The interview focuses heavily on the US context, potentially omitting relevant examples and perspectives from other countries with different regulatory frameworks and approaches to internet governance. While the mention of Guifi.net in Catalonia is an exception, a broader global perspective would enrich the analysis.
False Dichotomy
The interview presents a somewhat simplistic dichotomy between the current, largely privatized internet and a completely community-owned alternative. The reality likely lies in a more nuanced spectrum of models, including public-private partnerships and hybrid approaches. This framing could limit readers' understanding of the range of possible solutions.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the unequal access to internet, particularly in the US where high costs and poor service disproportionately affect low-income communities. Promoting community-owned networks and advocating for universal access directly addresses this inequality by ensuring everyone has the opportunity to participate in the digital economy and society.