Subject: Re: Markle initiative for universal e-mail
Craig A. Johnson (caj@tdrs.com)
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 02:33:24 -0400
Message-Id: <199804170626.CAA20825@ice.clark.net> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1998 02:33:24 -0400 To: roundtable@cni.org From: "Craig A. Johnson" <caj@tdrs.com> Subject: Re: Markle initiative for universal e-mail In-Reply-To: <3.0.3.32.19980416135108.006a614c@popserv.ucop.edu> References: <008c01bd69c5$5d30e080$510605c6@sam1.idi.net>
On 4/16/98, Karen Coyle <karen.coyle@ucop.edu> wrote:
>
> On 4/16/98, Sam Simon <sam@simon.net> wrote:
> >
> > The goal of universal e-mail is, I agree, an outdated concept. It
> > is, for all practical purpsoes nerly here.
>
> I disagree with that. I don't consider a figure of 40% of the
> population to be "universal," yet that's what I recall as the latest
> estimate of people with email access. (Many of whom have that access
> only at work, BTW, where personal use may be disallowed.)
I would add that getting "wired" by the phone companies, as some on
this list so eagerly lust for, is not the be-all and end-all of the
information age. Sometimes a little wisdom, perspective, and utility in
how to manipulate information and glean knowledge might well substitute
for the panting rush to connect everyone to computers in service of the
much-vaunted and often scapegoted goal of "education."
Of course, in light of the "technorealist" manifesto and such, people
are bound to be confused, turned off, and cynical. Slogans can only
reach so far. Sometimes practical case experiences such as Coralee
pointed to in her post yesterday, are worth listening to and responding
to, and not just blowing out one's posterior.
And, interestingly enough, sometimes we don't need the Bells, who
sponsor ATC and others on this list, to make the local and community
connections that are desirable. Sometimes there are the dreaded cable
companies, or -- imagine this -- wireless companies.
So, before we all start shoving the big broadband pipes with
omni-utilities down neighborhood throats, it might be wise to stand back
just a bit and ask what the policy goal is -- to further enrich and
enhance local monopolies or to actually diversify information. This
question has rarely been asked of late on this list.
Some recent posters, who are funded primarily by the Bells, seem to
have problems with the advocacy of so-called "universal" e-mail access.
Since terms are rarely defined, even less rarely understood, and often
politically manipulated, I really suggest that people make their
political and social goals clear, lest this discussion become yet
another polemic on the issues.
Craig
Craig A. Johnson
<caj@tdrs.com>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a16 : Tue Mar 23 1999 - 03:33:24 EST