Special Issue 5/1/02 Volume 11 No. 1
In Memory of Michael Hauben: Discoverer of Netizens
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[2] The Emergence of the Netizen,
Is the Early Vision Still Viable?*
by Ronda Hauben
ronda@panix.com
I want to explore a vision for the future, a vision that builds on the
inspiration provided the world by the French concept of "the citizen".
The vision is based on a new form of "citizen" that has grown up with
the Internet, called the "netizen".(1)
In 1992-1993, Michael Hauben, co-author of the book Netizens: On the
History and Impact of Usenet and the Internet was in his second year
as a college student at Columbia University in New York City.
Describing the research that he did which revealed the emergence of
Netizens, Michael writes:
I started using local bulletin board systems (called bbs's) in
Michigan in 1985. After several years of participation on both
local hobbyist-run computer bulletin board systems and the
global Usenet, I began to research Usenet and the Internet.
The computer bulletin board culture being described flourished in the
U.S. and parts of Europe and elsewhere in the 1980s to the early
1990s. As a hobby, early computer users set up their own home
computers to make it possible for other people to call, leave messages
or programs, respond to the messages or download the programs. They
used modems and the telephone lines to connect their computers. As a
teenager in Michigan in the 1980s, Michael was part of this computer
bulletin board community of sharing ideas, discussion and software.
From other computer users who were part of this community, he learned
about the Internet. By the early 1990s the Internet had become a
network of networks that spanned the globe. Michael also learned of
Usenet which used telephones, computers, modems and the Unix operating
system to send messages around the world. Usenet and the Internet made
it possible for computer users to have online discussions with people
from other parts of the world, to share technical problems, and to get
help from a global online community. Michael continues:
This was a new environment for me. Little thoughtful
conversation was encouraged in my high school. Since my daily
life did not provide places and people to talk with about real
issues and real world topics, I wondered why the online
experience encouraged such discussion and consideration of
others. Where did such a culture spring from? And how did it
arise? During my sophomore year of college in 1992, I was
curious to explore and better understand this new online
world. (Netizens, "Preface", page ix)
By 1995, Michael's research was recognized internationally, and he was
invited to Japan to speak at a conference about the subject of
Netizens. In his talk, he describes his early investigation of Usenet
and the Internet. He explains how "As part of course work at Columbia
(University) I explored these questions. One professor encouraged me
to use Usenet and the Internet as places to conduct research. My
research was real participation in the online community, exploring how
and why these communication forums functioned." He continues, "I
posted questions on Usenet, mailing lists and freenets [Freenets were
just springing up at the time as community networks which provided
local people with free access to the Internet- ed]. Along with my
questions I would attach some worthwhile preliminary research. People
respected my questions and found the preliminary research helpful. The
entire process was one of mutual respect and sharing of research and
ideas, fostering a sense of community and participation." (Netizens,
page ix)
Through this research process, he "found that on the Net people
willingly help each other and work together to define and address
issues important to them." (Ibid)
This was the experience people had on Internet mailing lists and
Usenet newsgroups in the early 1990s, before the web culture had
developed and spread. What one found online was a great deal of
discussion and interactive communication. This was like the computer
bulletin board culture. While the computer bulletin boards put users
in contact with local computer users, Usenet newsgroups and Internet
mailing lists put users in contact with other computer users from
around the world. When Michael posted his early research questions on
Usenet and the Internet he received about 60 responses from around the
globe. A number of these responses were detailed descriptions of how
people online had found the Net an exciting and important contribution
to their lives.
Elaborating on the progression of his research, Michael writes:
My initial research concerned the origins and development of
the global discussion forum Usenet. For my second paper, I
wanted to explore the larger Net, what it was, and its
significance. This is when my research uncovered the remaining
details that helped me recognize the emergence of Netizens.
(Netizens, page x)
While people answering his questions were describing how the Internet
and Usenet were helpful in their lives, many wrote about their efforts
to contribute to the Net, and to help spread access to those not yet
online. It is this second aspect of the responses that Michael
received which he recognized as an especially significant aspect of
his research.
Describing the characteristics of those he came to call netizens,
Michael writes:
There are people online who actively contribute to the
development of the Net. These are people who understand the
value of collective work and the communal aspects of public
communications. These are the people who discuss and debate
topics in a constructive manner, who e-mail answers to people
and provide help to newcomers, who maintain FAQ's, files and
other public information repositories. These are the people
who discuss the nature and role of this new communications
medium. These are the people who as citizens of the Net I
realized were Netizens. (Netizens, pages ix-x)
Later Michael elaborates:
Net.citizen was used in Usenet... and this really represented
what people were telling me - they were really net citizens -
which Netizen captures. To be a 鮮etizen' is different from
being a 祖itizen'. This is because to be on the Net is to be
part of a global community. To be a citizen restricts someone
to a more local or geographical orientation. (From "Webchat
with Michael Hauben," Jan. 25, 1996, see http://www.columbia.edu/
~hauben/papers/jr_gii_summit-webchat.txt, here after Webchat)
Michael was not referring to all users who get online. He
differentiates between netizens and others online:
Netizens are not just anyone who comes online. Netizens are
especially not people who come online for individual gain or
profit. They are not people who come to the Net thinking it is
a service. Rather, they are people who understand that it
takes effort and action on each and everyone's part to make
the Net a regenerative and vibrant community and resource."
(Netizens, page x)
The talk Michael was invited to present in Japan, was given in
November 1995. The talk reflected his experiences and online research
from 1992-1995.
By 1995 the U.S. portions of the Internet was becoming increasingly
commercialized. There was an effort on the part of the U.S. mass media
to promote a "get rich quick" view of the Internet. Many who have come
online since 1995 have not had the experience of the early culture of
interactive participation and sharing that prevailed through the early
1990s. Instead these origins are hidden and the early development of
the Internet is erroneously characterized as a period of "exclusivity".
This is not an accurate description. By the early 1990s users were
finding ways to spread the Internet through civic efforts like
creating community networks and Freenets and through creating gateways
between different networks like the Unix UUCP network and the Internet
and Fidonet. But by 1995 the U.S. government no longer supported the
efforts which would continued the sharing and cooperative culture of
the early Internet. Instead there was a vigorous campaign to
commercialize and privatize the U.S. portion of the public Internet.
(The way this was done was probably also in violation of U.S.
constitutional provisions with respect to the necessary public
processes to be undertaken before public property is privatized.
However, the commercial pressure to carry the privatization out
quickly left little time to challenge the process.)
In response to the growing commercialization and privatization,
Michael and I set out to do research into the origins of the sharing,
participatory Internet and Usenet culture to better understand the
nature of the interesting online world we had become part of in the
early 1990s.
In January 1994 we put a draft book online documenting the origins of
the online network and culture it gave birth to. In his preface to the
book Michael wrote:
As more and more people join the online community and
contribute towards the nurturing of the Net and towards the
development of a great shared social wealth, the ideas and
values of netizenship spread. But with the increasing
commercialization and privatization of the Net, Netizenship is
being challenged. During such a period it is valuable to look
back at the pioneering vision and actions that made the Net
possible and examine the lessons they provide. (Netizens,
page xi)
In the next section, I look back at the pioneering vision.
Historical Origins of the Vision for the Net
Through studies of the history of the Internet, it became evident that
the vision for its development had been pioneered by J.C.R. Licklider,
an experimental psychologist who was interested in human-computer
relation. In 1993, Micheal wrote:
The world of the Netizen was envisioned more than twenty-five
years ago by J.C.R. Licklider. Licklider brought to his
leadership of the U.S. Department of Defense's ARPA program a
vision of the 訴ntergalatic computer network'. (Netizens,
page 5)
Licklider introduced this vision when he gave talks for the Advanced
Research Projects Agency (ARPA) program inspiring people with the idea
of the importance of a new form of computing and of the potential for
a network that would make it possible to communicate utilizing
computers.
In a paper that Licklider wrote with Robert Taylor in 1968, they
established several principles about how the computer would play a
helpful role in human communication.(2) They wrote:
We believe that communicators have to do something nontrivial
with the information they send and receive ... to interact
with the richness of living information -- not merely in the
passive way that we have become accustomed to using books and
libraries, but as active participants in an ongoing process,
bringing something to it through our interaction with it, and
not simply receiving from it by our connection to it.
We want to emphasize something beyond its one-way transfer:
the increasing significance of the jointly constructive, the
mutually reinforcing aspect of communication - the part that
transcends 創ow that we both know a fact that only one of us
knew before.' When minds interact, new ideas emerge.
(Licklider and Taylor, page 21)
Michael had experienced the importance of online interaction among
people with different ideas.
From the diversity, something new developed. The network of
various human communicators quickly forms changes its goals,
disbands and reforms into new collaborations. The fluidity of
such group dynamics leads to a quickening of the creation of
new ideas. Groups can form to discuss an idea, focus in or
broaden out, and reform to fit the new ideas that have been
worked out. (Netizens, page 6)
The virtual space created on noncommercial networks was accessible to
all, while the content on commercial networks like Compuserve or
America Online was only accessible by those who paid to belong.
(Netizens, pages 6-7)
By the early 1990s the research Licklider had initiated at ARPA had
led to the development of first the ARPANET and then the Internet.
Also an effort by graduate students to have an online newsletter
resulted in a newsgroup network known as Usenet.
In 1996, Michael wrote that the Net should be like a public utility -
akin to postal/telephone/water. While he did not necessarily favor
regulation, he explained that regulation by government would be
necessary to have equal access available to all to the net. "The
market," he predicted, "would not make the Internet available in areas
where it could not make a profit (and that the Net would lose if all
potential contributors were not able to participate.)"
Michael saw the Internet and Usenet as a communications public utility
that needed government support so that it could be available to all.
In response to a sensitivity among many online in the U.S. about
government regulation meaning potential censorship, he emphasized that
"Regulation does not mean censorship.... Rather regulation means
putting the public interest over the commercial or private interest.
The Net is a shared commons, which means it is important to make it
available to the many, and not grabable by the few." (Webchat)
By 1996, he found that:
Advertising will (and is) polluting the online world. Those
with money will quickly take over the spaces (...and) those
without money will not be able to. And those thinking of money
are not thinking about a global cooperative community - they
are thinking of themselves. (Ibid.)
He believed that commercial entities could not develop a network that
would spread access to all, a network that would encourage user
participation in its development. He also proposed the need for
citizens to find ways to influence their governments to counter the
pressure on government by commercial entities to direct the Internet's
development in commercial directions.
A cornerstone before commercialization was the broad ranging
discussion on Usenet or mailing lists. This discussion encouraged the
interaction and exchange of diverse viewpoints. "Only by seeing many
points of view," writes Michael, "can one figure out his or her
position on a topic." Many of the people who responded to his research
questions told how they valued hearing from people with different
experiences and points of view. "Brain-storming among different types
of people," he concludes, "produces robust thinking."
Information is no longer a fixed commodity or resource on the
Net. It is constantly being added to and improved collectively.
The Net provides an alternative to the normal channels and ways
of doing things. The Net allows for the meeting of minds to form
and develop new ideas. It brings people's thinking processes out
of isolation and out into the open. Every user of the Net gains
the role of being special and useful. The fact that every user
has his or her own opinions and ideas adds to the general body
of specialized knowledge on the Net. Each netizen thus becomes
a special resource valuable to the Net. (Netizens, pages 4-5)
In the course of researching the origins of networking, Michael
discovered the source of the culture of sharing and cooperation.
Developing the Internet was "not a commercial process.... The
壮elflessness' grew out of the fact that technology required helping
each other to succeed - for people to develop and further computing
technologies." He also recognized the need for open code and for the
open publication of the technical developments. He writes:
The public funding of the ARPANET project meant that the
documentation would be made public and freely available. The
documentation was neither restricted nor classified. This open
process encouraging communication was necessary for these
pioneers to succeed. Research in new fields of study requires
that researchers cooperate and communicate in order to share
their expertise. Such openness is especially critical when no
one person has the answers in advance. (Netizens, page 109)
Protection
Michael pointed out that both Usenet and the Internet flourished in
their early development because they were protected from commercial
use. He writes:
Usenet has not been allowed to be abused as a profit-making
venture by any one individual or group. Rather people are
fighting to keep it a resource that is helpful to society as a
whole. (Netizens, page 55)
Commercial usage was prohibited on the U.S. part of the emerging
Internet known as the NSFnet. "There were Acceptable Use Policies
(AUP) that existed because these networks were initially founded and
financed by public money."
This protection then extended to the networks from other countries
that connected to the NSFnet. Since on the NSFnet, Michael writes,
"commercial usage was prohibited, which meant it was also discouraged
on other networks that gatewayed into the NSFnet backbone." (Netizens,
page 29)
Recognizing the need for protection for such a medium, Michael urges
the importance of the net and of protecting the people's ability to
develop its potential. He writes, "For the people of the world, the
Net provides a powerful means for peaceful assembly. Peaceful assembly
allows people to take control. This power deserves to be appreciated
and protected. Any medium that helps people hold or gain power is
something special that has to be protected." (Netizens, page 26)
Not only did government regulation provide a protection from
commercial abuse during the Net's development, but the developing
network also provided a means for citizens to affect and influence
their governments.
A study Michael did of an online conference sponsored by the U.S.
government in November 1994 showed the potential of the Net for making
available to government a broad range of public views on an important
new development like the Internet. Similarly, discussion groups such
as those that Usenet provided could grow to provide a forum through
which people would be able to influence their governments. Also such
forums would allow for discussion and debate of issues in a mode that
facilitates mass participation. Such discussion, Michael writes,
"becomes a source of independent information. An independent source is
helpful in the search for truth."(Netizens, page 56) But universal
access to the Internet is necessary to fulfill its promise. The
Internet is identified as a "public good" that needs to be accessible
to all the population. (Netizens, page 246)
Michael recognized the difference between the view towards Usenet and
the Internet that he received in the responses to his research
questions and the view towards the future development of the Net which
was being proposed then by the U.S. government. Describing the two
different views, he writes:
The picture of the Internet painted by the U.S. government has
been one of an 訴nformation superhighway' or 訴nformation
infrastructure' to which people could connect, download some
data or purchase some goods, and then disconnect. This image
is very different from the ... cooperative communications
forums on Usenet where everyone..[was welcomed to] contribute.
The transfer of information is secondary ... in contrast to the
reality that the Internet and Usenet [can] provide a place where
people can share ideas, observations and questions. (Netizens,
page 254)
An important democratic development occurred. Users on Usenet and
mailing lists were able to be the architects of the evolving networks.
Michael writes:
The basic element of Usenet is a post. Each individual post
consists of a unique contribution from a user, placed in a
subject area called a newsgroup. Usenet grew from the ground
up in a grassroots manner. ... In its simplest form, Usenet
represents democracy. Inherent in most mass media is central
control of content. Many people are influenced by the
decisions of a few.... Usenet, however, is controlled by its
audience.... Most of the material for Usenet is contributed by
the same people who actively read Usenet. Thus, the audience
to Usenet, decides the content and subject matter to be thought
about, presented and debated.
The ideas that exist on Usenet come from the mass of people
who participate in it. In this way, Usenet is an uncensored
forum for debate where many sides of an issue come into
view.... People control what happens on Usenet. In this rare
situation, issues and concerns that are of interest and thus
important to the participants, are brought up.... The range of
Usenet connectivity is international and quickly expanding
into every nook and cranny around the world. This explosive
expansion allows growing communication with people around the
world. (Netizens, page 49)
From Usenet pioneers like Greg Woodbury, Michael learned that, "it was
the desire for communication that helped this social network develop
and expand." While appreciating the potential of Usenet and the
Internet to help people make a better world possible, many of those
online in the mid 1990s also anticipated how difficult it would be to
bring this about.
"People on the Net," Michael writes, "need to be active in order to
bring about the best possible use of the Net." (Webchat)
It is interesting to see how closely the conceptual vision Michael
developed matched that of the vision of J.C.R. Licklider. Michael's
views were influenced by his experience online, his study and the
comments he received in response to his research questions from people
around the world.(3) Subsequent research shows Licklider had
recognized that to be able to develop computer and network science and
technology, an online community that would encourage users to
contribute was needed. This collaborative community is what people
found online on Usenet and the Internet even into the early 1990s.
Also Licklider advocated support and protection of the creative users
online who were eager to explore how to utilize the Internet in
interesting and novel new ways. Licklider staunchly maintained that
users had to be participants in making the decisions that would
develop and spread the Internet to all. He warned that commercial
entities could not develop a network that would spread access to all
or that would encourage user participation in its development.
The Future
In a similar way Licklider emphasized the need for a participatory
evolution for the Internet, and for there to be a public utility
framework for its development, Licklider sees that there is a public
policy choice that must be made. He writes: (4)
It's a choice between data and knowledge. It's either mere
access to information or interaction with information. And for
mankind it implies either an enmeshment in silent gears of the
great electrical machine or mastery of a new and truly plastic
medium for formulating ideas and for explaining, expressing
and communicating them.
Michael and a friend he met when he was invited to Japan proposed a
Netizens Association as a way to take up the challenges of evolving a
network that would support interactive communication and user
participation.(5) Such an association could take on the goals of the
Netizen and netizenship. It could be a help in the struggle to forge a
net that will carry on the vision of an interactive participatory
network of networks that Licklider introduced. In January 1993 Michael
put together a Draft Declaration of the Rights of Netizens which could
be a starting point for a collaboration of Netizens who are committed
to the original vision for the Internet. This vision has made it
possible for the Internet to develop an infrastructure capable of
promoting vibrant interactive participation and resource sharing
before the commercialization and privatization of the Net. Michael
writes in the Draft Declaration of the Rights of Netizens:
The Net is not a Service, it is a Right. It is only valuable
when it is collective and universal. Volunteer effort protects
the intellectual and technological common-wealth that is being
created. DO NOT UNDERESTIMATE THE POWER OF THE NET and
NETIZENS.(6)
Conclusion
The vision of J.C.R. Licklider and then of users who Michael
recognized were netizens has helped to guide and spread a
participatory and interactive new form of communication
infrastructure.
However the commercial model for the Internet's development is very
different. It aims to create passive users who are at the mercy of
powerful corporations both for their access to the Net and for the
determination of how they can use the Net. The commercial model is a
challenge to the early vision of a participatory Internet where all
the population has the possibility of gaining access and of shaping
the network form and content that is socially beneficial.
How will netizens support each other to continue working toward their
goal? Is there a need for a netizens association as Michael and his
friend from Japan Hiro proposed? The path forward is not well marked.
In 1961, the linguist, Yehoshua Bar Hillel speaking about the
computer, pointed out that we cannot know the future. If however we
know what we are striving for, we can work for the future we want to
have.(7)
What future do we want to have?
The visions of J.C.R. Licklider and Michael Hauben are of a
participatory future. If we keep those visions alive we keep alive the
possibility that the potential of the Internet will be realized.
Footnotes
1) This article is taken from a speech given during "Semaine
Europeenne" in Strasbourg, France sponsored by L'Institue d'Etudes
Politiques (IEP). More than three hundred students attended and
participated in a week long discussion of "Europe & Internet" in the
Winston Churchill building of the European Parliament. See:
http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/strasbourg.txt
2) Licklider, J.C.R. and Robert Taylor. "The Computer as a
Communication Device." In Science and Technology: For the Technical
Men in Management. No 76. April, 1968. Pages 21-31. Also reprinted in
In Memoriam: J.C.R. Licklider: 1915-1990. Report 61. Systems Research
Center. Digital Equipment Corporation. Palo Alto, California. August
7, 1990. Pp. 21-41.12
3) See also the Livingnet website http://livinginternet.com/. William
Stewart the creator of the site writes:
Joseph Carl Robnett 銑ick' Licklider developed the idea of a
universal network, spread his vision throughout the IPTO, and
inspired his successors to realize his dream by creation of
the ARPANET. He also developed the concepts that led to the
idea of the Netizen.
4) Licklider, "Social Prospects of Information Utilities" in "The
Information Utility and Social Choice, H. Sackman and Norman Nie,
editors, AFIPS Press, Montvale, 1970, p 6. Licklider comments about
the choice, "Thus though the crux is a switch, it is not a switch in a
level track. One branch goes down, one up."
5) Michael writes: After our visit, I wrote Hiro Takashi that I was
very happy to have met him and his friends from their computer club at
his University. In his e-mail when I returned home he asked if there
was a Netizens Association. He wrote in a P.S. in an e-mail of Dec. 6
"Netizen association is available? If not in Japan, I want to make
it." I told him I did not know of any and asked him what he had in
mind for a Netizens Association to do. He responded:
I think [a] Netizen Association is a guide into tomorrow's
Internet world. Internet and other network[s] have a flood of
electrical informations. So people cannot swim very good in
Internet. So Netizen Association tell or advise how to swim or
get selected information. The association act as guide. Oh,
and we have to spread information about concept of netizen.
But making association process has many difficult points, I
think. So we have to give careful consideration to the matter.
6) Proposed Declaration of the Rights of Netizens (Reproduced in this
issue. See article [14])
7) Y. Bar Hillel in Computers and the World of the Future, edited by
Martin Greenberger, MIT Press, 1962, page 324.
* This article is from an invited talk presented at the European
Parliament Building in Strasbourg, France. The talk was given on
February 26, 2002 to students as part of a panel on "the Internet and
Politics." See http://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/strasbourg.txt
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Reprinted from the Amateur Computerist Vol 11 No 1, May 1, 2002.
The whole issue or a subscription is available for free via email.
Send a request to jrh@ais.org or see http://www.ais.org/~jrh/acn/
----------------------------------------------------------------------