[2]      The Effect of the Net on the Professional News Media:
                      The USENET News Collective   
                     The Man-Computer News Symbiosis
                                               by Michael Hauben
                                                  hauben@columbia.edu

     "The archdeacon contemplated the gigantic cathedral for a time in 
     silence, then he sighed and stretched out his right hand towards
     the printed book lying open on his table and his left hand towards
     Notre Dame, and he looked sadly from the book to the church:

     'Alas,' he said, 'this will kill that.'"
                                         Victor Hugo, Notre Dame de Paris

I. Media criticism
     Will this kill that? Will the new online forms of discourse dethrone 
the professional news media?

     The French writer Victor Hugo observed that the printed book rose to 
replace the cathedral and the church as the conveyor of important ideas in 
the 15th century. Will Usenet and other young online discussion forums 
develop to replace the current news media? Various people throughout 
society are currently discussing this question.

     The role of modern journalism is being reconsidered in a variety of 
ways. There are journalists and media critics, like the late Professor 
Christopher Lasch, who have challenged the fundamental premises of 
professional journalism. There are other journalists like Wall Street 
Journal reporter Jared Sandberg, who cover an online beat, and are learning 
quickly about the growing online public forums. These two approaches are 
beginning to converge to make it possible to understand the changes in the 
role of the media in our society brought about by the development of the 
Internet and Usenet.

     Media critics like Christopher Lasch have established a theoretical 
foundation that makes it possible to critique the news media and challenge 
the current practice of these media. In "Journalism, Publicity, and the 
Lost Art of Argument," Lasch argued: "What democracy requires is public 
debate, and not information. Of course, it needs information, too, but the 
kind of information it needs can be generated only by vigorous popular 
debate."(1)

     Applying his critique to the press, Lasch wrote: "From these 
considerations it follows the job of the press is to encourage debate, not 
to supply the public with information. But as things now stand the press 
generates information in abundance, and nobody pays any attention."(2)

     Lasch explained that more and more people are getting less and less 
interested in the press because, "Much of the press now delivers an 
abundance of useless, indigestible information that nobody wants, most of 
which ends up as unread waste."(3)

     Reporters like Jared Sandberg of the Wall Street Journal, on the other 
hand, recognize that more and more of the information that the public is 
interested in, is starting to come from people other than professional 
journalists. In an article about the April 1995 Oklahoma Federal Building 
explosion, Sandberg writes: "In times of crisis, the Internet has become 
the medium of choice for users to learn more about breaking news, often 
faster than many news organizations can deliver it."(4)

     People curious and concerned about relatives and others present on the 
scene turned to the Net to find out timely information about survivors and 
to discuss the questions raised by the event. Soon after the explosion, it 
was reported and discussed live on Internet Relay Chat, in newsgroups on 
Usenet such as alt.current-events.amfb-explosion and on various Web sites. 
Sandberg noted that many logged onto the Internet to get news from first-
hand observers rather than turning on the TV to CNN or comparable news
sources.

     Along with the broader strata of the population that has begun to 
report and discuss the news via the Internet and Usenet, a definition of 
who is a media critic is developing. Journalists and media critics like 
Martha Fitzsimon and Lawrence T. McGill present such a broader definition 
of media critics when they write, "Everyone who watches television, listens 
to a radio or reads  passes judgment on what they see, hear or read."(5) 
Acknowledging the public's discon tent with the traditional forms of the 
media, they note that, "the evaluations of the media put forward by the 
public are grim and getting worse."(6)

     Other journalists have written about public criticism of the news 
media. In his article, "Encounters Online", Thomas Valovic recognizes some 
of the advantages inherent in the new online form of criticism. Unlike old 
criticism, the new type "fosters dialogue between reporters and 
readers."(7) He observes how this dialogue "can subject reporters to 
interrogations by experts that undermine journalists' claim to speak with 
authority."(8) 

     Changes are taking place in the field of journalism, and these changes 
are apparent to some, but not all journalists and media critics. Tom 
Goldstein, Dean of the University of California at Berkeley Journalism 
School, observes that change is occurring, but the results are not fully 
understood.(9) 

II. Examining the role of Internet/Usenet and the press
     There are discussions online about the role of the press and the role 
of online discussion forums. The debate is active. There are those who 
believe the printed press is here to stay, while others contend that 
interactive discussion forums are likely to replace the authority of the 
print news media. Those who argue for the dominance of the online media 
present impassioned arguments. Their comments are much more persuasive than 
those who defend the traditional role of the print media as something that 
is handy to read over breakfast or on the train. In a newsgroup thread 
discussing the future of print journalism, Gloria Stern stated: "My 
experience is that I have garnered more information from the Internet than 
I ever could from any newspaper. Topical or not, it has given me community 
that I never had before. I touch base with more informed kindred souls than 
any tonnage of paper could ever bring me."(10)

     Regularly, people are commenting on how they have stopped reading 
newspapers. Even those who continue to read printed newspapers note that 
Usenet has become one of the important sources for their news. For example, 
a user wrote: "I do get the NY Times every day, and the Post and the 
Washington Times and the Wall Street Journal (along with about 100 other 
hard-copy publications), and I still find Usenet a valuable source of in-
depth news reporting."(11) 

     More and more people on Usenet have announced their discontent with 
the traditional one-way media, often leading to their refusal to seriously 
read newspapers again. In a discussion about a Time magazine article about 
the Internet and Usenet, Elizabeth Fischer wrote: "The point of the whole 
exercise is that for us, most of us, paper media is a dead issue (so to 
speak)."(12) 

     In the same thread, Jim Zoes stated the challenge posed by the online 
media for reporters: "This writer believes that you (the traditional press) 
face the same challenge that the monks in the monastery faced when 
Gutenberg started printing Bibles."(13) 

     Describing why the new media represent such a formidable foe, Zoes 
continued: "Your top-down model of journalism allows traditional media to 
control the debate, and even if you provide opportunity for opposing views, 
the editor always had the last word. In the new paradigm, not only do you 
not necessarily have the last word, you no longer even control the flow of 
the debate."(14) 

     He concludes with his understanding of the value of Usenet to society: 
"The growth and acceptance of e-mail, coupled with discussion groups 
(Usenet) and mail lists provide for a 'market place of ideas' hitherto not 
possible since perhaps the days of the classic Athenians."(15)

     Others present their views on a more personal level. One poster 
writes: "I will not purchase another issue of Newsweek. I won't even glance 
through their magazine if it's lying around now given what a shoddy job 
they did on that article."(16)

     Another explains: "My husband brought [the article] home for me to 
read and [I] said, 'Where is that damn follow up key? ARGH!' I've pretty 
much quit reading mainstream media except when someone puts something in 
front of me or I'm riding the bus to work."(17)

     These responses are just some of the recent examples of people voicing 
their discontent with the professional news media. The online forum 
provides a public way of sharing this discontent with others. It is in 
sharing ideas and understandings with others with similar views that 
grassroots efforts begin to attempt to change society. 

     While some Net users have stopped reading the professional news media, 
others are interested in in fluencing the media to more accurately portray 
the Net. Many are critical of the news media's reporting of the Internet, 
and other events. Users of the Internet are interested in protecting the 
Internet. They do this by watch-dogging politicians and journalists. 
Concern with the coverage of the Internet in the press comes from first-
hand experience with the Internet. One Net-user expressing such 
dissatisfaction writes: "The Net is a special problem for reporters, 
because bad reporting in other areas is protected by distance. If someone 
reports to the Times from Croatia, you're not going to have a better source 
unless you've been there (imagine how many people in that part of the world 
could correct the reports we read). All points of Usenet are equidistant 
from the user and the reporter. We can check their accuracy at every move. 
And what do we notice? Not the parts that the reporter gets right, just the 
errors. And Usenet is such a complete culture that no reporter, absent some 
form of formal training or total immersion in the Net, is going to get it 
all right."(18)

     Another online critic writes: "It's scary when you actually are 
familiar with what a journalist is writing about. Kinda punches a whole 
bunch of holes in the 'facts'. Unfortunately it's been going on for a 
looong time we, the general viewing public, just aren't up to speed on the 
majority of issues. That whole 'faith in media' thing. Yick. I can't even 
trust the damn AP wire anymore after reading an enormous amount of total 
crap on it during the first few hours of the Oklahoma bombing."(19) 

     In Usenet's formation of a community, that com munity has developed 
the self-awareness to respond to and reject an outside description of the 
Net. If the Net was just the telephone lines and computer infra structure 
making up a machine, that very machine could not object and scold 
journalists for describing it as a spreader of pornography or a bomb-
production press. Wesley Howard believes that the critical on line 
commentary is having a healthy effect on the press: "The coverage has 
become more accurate and less sloppy in its coverage of the Net because it 
(the Net) has become more defined itself from a cultural point of view. 
Partly because of growth and partly because of what the media was saying 
fed debates and caused a firmer definition within itself. This does not 
mean the print media was in any way responsible for the Net's self 
definition, but was one influence of many."(20)

     Another person, writing from Japan, believed that journalists should 
be more responsible, urging that "all journalists should be forced to have 
an e-mail address." He explained: "Journalists usually have a much bigger 
audience than their critics. I often feel a sense of helplessness in trying 
to counter the damage they cause when they abuse their privilege. Often it 
is impossible even to get the attention of the persons responsible for the 
lies and distortions."(21)

     Usenet newsgroups and mailing lists provide a media where people are  
in control. People who are online understand the value of this control and  
are trying to articulate their understandings. Some of this discussion is 
being carried on on Usenet. Having the ability to control the mass media 
also encourages people to try to affect other media. The proposal to 
require print journalists to acquire and publicize an e-mail address is an 
example of how online users are trying to apply the lessons learned from 
the online media to change the print media. 

III. People as critics: the role the Net is playing and will play in the 
future 
     People online are excited, and this is not an exaggeration. The 
various discussion forums connected to the global computer communications 
network (or the Net) are the prototype for a new public form of 
communication. This new form of human communication will either supplement 
the current forms of news or replace them. One person on a newsgroup 
succinctly stated: "The real news is right here. And it can't get any newer 
because I watch it as it happens."(22)

     The very concept of news is being reinvented as people come to realize 
that they can provide the news about the environment they live in; that 
people can contribute their real-life conditions and this information 
proves worthwhile for others. The post continued: "As other segments of 
society come online, we will have less and less need for some commercially 
driven entity that gathers the news for me, filters it, and then delivers 
it to me, hoping fervently that I'll find enough of interest to keep paying 
for it."(23)

     Such sentiment represents a fundamental challenge to the professional 
creation and dissemination of news. The online discussion forums allow open 
and free discourse. Individuals outside of the traditional power structures 
are finding a forum in which to contribute, where those contributions are 
welcomed. Describing the importance of the open forum available on the Net, 
Dolores Dege wrote: "The most important and eventually most powerful aspect 
of the Net will be the effect(s) of having access to alternative viewpoints 
to the published and usually (although not always either intentionally or 
consciously) biased local news media. This access to differing 'truths' is 
similar to the communication revolution which occurred when the first 
printing presses made knowledge available to the common populace, instead 
of held in the tight fists of the clergy and ruling classes."(24)

     This change in who makes the news is also apparent to Keith Cowing: 
"How one becomes a 'provider' and 'receiver' of information is being 
totally revamped. The status quo hasn't quite noticed yet this is what is 
so interesting."(25)

     While this openness also encourages different conspiracy theorists and 
crackpots to write messages, their contributions are scrutinized as much as 
any other posting. This uncensored environment leads to a sorting out of 
mis-truths from thoughtful convictions. Many people online keep their wits 
about them and seek to refute half-truths and lies. A post from Australia 
notes that it is common to post refutations of inaccurate posts: "One of 
the good things about Usenet is the propensity of people to post 
refutations of false information that others have posted."(26)

     As the online media are in the control of many people, no one person 
can come online and drastically alter the flow or quality of discussion. The 
multiplicity of ideas and opinions make Usenet and mailing lists the 
opposite of a free-for-all.

IV. Qualities of this new medium
     A common assumption of the ethic of individualism is that the 
individual is in control and is the prime mover of society. Others believe 
that it is not the individual who is in control, but that society is being 
controlled by people organized around the various large corporations that 
own so much of our society whether those corporations are the media, 
manufacturers, etc. The global computer communications networks currently 
allow uncensored expression from the individual at a bottom rung of society. 
The grassroots connection of people around the world and in local 
communities based on common interests is an important step in bringing 
people more control over their lives. Lisa Pease wrote in alt.journalism: 
"The net requires no permissions, no groveling to authority, no editors to 
deal with no one basically to say 'no don't say that.' As a result, far 
more has been said here publicly than has probably been said in a hundred 
years about issues that really matter political prisoners, democratic 
uprisings, exposure of disinformation this is what makes the net more 
valuable than any other news source."(27)

     Similar views are expressed by others about the power of the Internet 
to work in favor of people rather than commercial conglomerates: "The 
Internet is our last hope for a medium that will enable individuals to 
combat the overpowering influence of the commercial media to shape public 
opinion, voter attitudes, select candidates, influence legislation, 
etc."(28)

     People are beginning to be empowered by the open communications the 
online media provide. This empowerment is beginning to lead toward more 
active involvement by people in the societal issues they care about.

V. The Pentium story
     In discussions about the future of the online media, people have 
observed how Usenet makes it possible to challenge the privileges inherent 
in the traditional news media. John Pike started a thread describing the 
challenge the Net presents to the former content providers: "To me this is 
the really exciting opportunity for Usenet, namely that the professional 
content providers will be directly confronted with and by their audience. 
The prevailing info-structure privileges certain individuals by virtue of 
institutional affiliation. But cyberspace is a far more meritocractic 
environment the free exchange of ideas can take place regardless of 
institutional affiliation."(29) 

     Pike continues by arguing that online forums are becoming a place where 
"news" is both made and reported, and thus traditional sources are often 
scooped. He writes: "This has tremendously exciting possibilities for 
democratizing the info-structure, as the 'official' hardcopy implementations 
are increasingly lagging cyberspace in breaking news."(30)

     An example of news being made online occurred when Intel, the computer 
chip manufacturer, was forced to recall faulty Pentium chips because of the 
online pressure and the effect of that pressure on computer manufacturers 
such as IBM and Gateway. These companies put pressure on Intel because 
people using Usenet discovered problems with the Pentium. The online 
discussion led to people becoming active and getting the manufacturers of 
their computers, and Intel to fix the problems.

     In the article "Online Snits Fomenting Public Storms," Wall Street 
Journal reporters Bart Ziegler and Jared Sandberg commented: "Some industry 
in siders say that had the Pentium flub occurred five years ago, before the 
Internet got hot and the media caught on, Intel might have escaped a public 
flogging and avoided a costly recall."(31)

     Buried in the report is the acknowledgment that the traditional press 
would not have caught the defect in the Pentium chip, but that the online 
media forced the traditional media to respond. The original reporting about 
the problem was done in the Usenet newsgroup comp.sys.intel and further 
online discussion took place in that newsgroup and other newsgroups and on 
Internet mailing lists. The Wall Street Journal reporters recognized their 
debt to news that people were posting online to come up with a story that 
dealt with a major computer company and with the realworld role that Usenet 
played.

     In another article in the Wall Street Journal, reporter Fara Warner 
focused on the impact of the online news on Intel. "[Intel] offered 
consumers a promise of reliability and quality, and now that promise has 
been called into question," she writes, quoting the CEO of a consulting 
firm.(32) The people who did this questioning were the users of the 
computers with the faulty chips. Communicating about the problem online, 
these users were able to have an impact not otherwise possible. Ziegler and 
Sandberg noted that the discussions were online rather than in "traditional 
public forums like trade journals, newspapers or the electronic media."(33) 
Online users were able to work together to deal with a problem, instead of 
depending on other forums traditionally associated with reporting 
dissatisfaction with consumer goods. After all of the criticisms, Intel had 
to replace faulty chips to keep their reputation viable. The Wall Street 
Journal, New York Times and other newspapers and magazines played second 
fiddle to what was happening online. In their article, Ziegler and Sandberg 
quote Dean Tom Goldstein: "It's absolutely changing how journalism is 
practiced in ways that aren't fully developed."(34)

     These journalists acknowledge that the field of journalism is changing 
as a result of the existence of the online complaints. The online connection 
of people is forming a large and important social force.

     An Australian reporter, John Hilvert, commented on the value of being 
online: "[Usenet] can be a great source of leads about the mood of the Net. 
The recent GIF-Unisys-CompuServe row and the Intel Pentium bug are examples 
of Usenet taking an activist and ed ucative role."(35)

     Although it is hard to rely on any single piece of information, Usenet
is not about ideas in a vacuum. Usenet is about discussion and discourse. 
The great number and range of the unedited posts on Usenet bring up the 
question of whether editors are needed to deal with the amount of 
information. Discussing the need to take time to deal with the growing 
amount of information, a post on alt.internet.media-coverage explained, "The 
difference being that for the first time in human history, the general 
populace has the ability to determine what it finds important, rather than 
relying on the whims of those who knew how to write, or controlled the
printing presses. It means that we as individuals are going to have to deal 
with sifting through a lot of information on our own, but in the end I 
believe that we will all benefit from it."(36)

     Such posts lead to the question of what is meant by the notion of the
general populace and a popular press. The point is important, as those who 
are on the Net make up but a small percentage of the total population of 
either the United States or the world. However, that online population 
makes up a significant body of people connecting to each other online.(37)  
The fast rate of growth also makes one take note of the trends and 
developments. Defining what is meant by 'general populace and a popular 
press' the post continues: "By general populace, I mean those who can 
actually afford a computer, and a connection to the Net, or have access to a 
public terminal. As computer prices go down, the amount of people who fit 
this description will increase. At any rate, comparing the 5-10 million 
people with Usenet access, to the handful who control the mass media shows 
that even in a nascent stage, Usenet is far more the 'people's voice' than 
any media conglomerate could ever be."(38)

     Computer pioneers like Norbert Wiener, J.C.R.  Licklider and John
Kemeny discussed the need for man-computer symbiosis to help humans deal 
with the growing problems of our times.(39) The online discussion forums 
provide a new form of man-computer symbiosis. They are helpful intellectual 
exercises. It is healthy for society if all members think and make active 
use of their brains and Usenet is conducive to thinking. It is not the role 
of journalists to provide answers. Even if everybody's life is busy, what 
happens when they come to depend on the opinions and summaries of others as 
their own? Usenet is helping to create a mass community that works 
communally to aid the individual to come to his or her own opinions.

     Usenet works via the active involvement and thoughtful contributions
of each user. The Usenet software facilitates the creation of a community 
whose thought processes can accumulate and benefit the entire community. The 
creation of the printed book helped to increase the speed of the 
accumulation of ideas. Usenet now speeds up that process to help accumulate 
the thoughts of the moment. The resulting discussion seen on Usenet could 
not have been produced beforehand as the work of one individual.  The bias 
or the point of view of any one individual or group is no longer presented 
as the whole truth.

     Karl Krueger describes some of the value of Usenet in a post: "Over
time, Usenetters get better at being parts of the Usenet matrix because 
their own condensations support Usenet's, and this helps other users. In a 
way, Usenet is a 'meta-symbiont' with each user the user is a part of Usenet 
and benefits Usenet (with a few exceptions), and Usenet includes the user 
and benefits him/her."(40) 

     Krueger points out how experienced Usenet users contribute to the 
Usenet community. He writes: "As time increases normally, the experienced 
Usenet user uses Usenet to make himself more knowledgeable and successful. 
Experienced users also contribute back to Usenet, primarily in the forms of 
conveying knowledge (answering questions, compiling FAQs), conveying 
experience (being part of the environment a newbie interacts with), and 
protecting Usenet (upholding responsible and non-destructive use, canceling  
potentially damaging SPAMs, fighting 'newsgroup invasions', etc.)."(41)
 
     As each new user connects to Usenet, and learns from others, the Usenet 
collective grows and becomes one person richer. Krueger continues: "Provided 
that all users are willing to spend the minimal amount of effort to gain 
some basic Usenet experience then they can be added to this loop. In Usenet, 
old users gain their benefits from other old users, while simultaneously 
bringing new users into the old-users group to gain benefits."(42)

     The collective body of people, assisted by the Usenet software, has 
grown larger than any individual newspaper. As people continue to connect to 
Usenet and other discussion forums, the collective global population will 
contribute back to the human community in this new form of news. 

VI. Conclusion
     Newspapers and magazines are a convenient form for dealing with 
information transfer. People have grown accustomed to reading newspapers and 
magazines wherever and whenever they please. The growing dissatisfaction 
with the print media is more with the content than with the form. There is a 
significant criticism that the current print media do not allow for a 
dynamic response or follow-up to the articles in hand. One possible 
direction would be toward online distribution and home or on-site printing 
of online discussion groups. This would allow for the convenience of the 
traditional newspaper and magazine form to be connected to the dynamic 
conversation that online Netnews allows. The reader could choose at what 
point in the conversation or how much of the discussion to make a part of 
the printed form.  But this leaves out the element of interactivity. Still, 
it could be a temporary solution until the time when ubiquitous slate 
computers with mobile networks would allow the combination of a light, easy 
to handle screen, with a continuous connection with the Internet from any 
location. 

     Newspapers could continue to provide entertainment in the form of 
crossword puzzles, comics, classified ads, and entertainment sections (e.g., 
entertainment, lifestyles, sports, fashion, gossip, reviews, coupons, and so 
on). However, the real challenge comes in what is traditionally known as 
news, or information and newly breaking events from around the world.  
Citizen, or now Netizen reporters are challenging the premise that 
authoritative professional reporters are the only possible reporters of the 
news. The news of the day is biased and opinionated no matter how many 
claims for objectivity exist in the world of the reporter. In addition, the 
choice of what becomes news is clearly subjective. Now that more people are 
gaining a voice on the open public electronic discussion forums, previously 
unheard "news" is being made available. The current professional news 
reporting is not really reporting the news, rather it is reporting the news 
as decided by a certain set of economic or political interests. Todd Masco 
contrasts the two contending forms of the news media: "Free communication is 
essential to the proper functioning of an open, free society such as ours. 
In recent years, the functioning of this society has been impaired by the 
monolithic control of our means of communication and news gathering (through 
television and conglomerate-owned newspapers). This monolithic control 
allows issues to be talked about only really in terms that only the people 
who control the media and access to same can frame. Usenet, and [online] 
News in general, changes this: it allows real debate on issues, allowing 
perspectives from all sides to be seen."(43) 

     Journalists may survive, but they will be secondary to the symbiosis 
that the combination of the Usenet software and computers with the Usenet 
community produces. Karl Krueger observes how the Usenet collective is 
evolving to join man and machine into a news-gathering, sorting and 
disseminating body. He writes: "There is no need for Official Summarizers 
(a.k.a. journalists) on Usenet, because everyone does it by cross-posting, 
following-up, forwarding relevant articles to other places, maintaining ftp 
archives and WWW indexes of Usenet articles."(44) 

     He continues: "Journalists will never replace software. The purpose of 
journalists is similar to scribes in medieval times: to provide an 
information service when there is insufficient technology or insufficient 
general skill at using it. I'm not insulting journalism; it is a respectable 
profession and useful. But you won't need a journalist when you have a good 
enough newsreader/browser and know how to use it."(45) 

     These online commentators echo Victor Hugo's description of how the 
printed book grew up to replace the authority that architecture had held in 
earlier times. Hugo writes: "This was the presentiment that as human ideas 
changed their form they would change their mode of expression, that the 
crucial idea of each generation would no longer be written in the same 
material or in the same way, that the book of stone, so solid and durable, 
would give way to the book of paper, which was more solid and durable 
still."(46) 

     Today, similarly, the need for a broader, and more cooperative 
gathering and reporting of the news has helped to create the new online 
media that are gradually supplanting the traditional forms of journalism. 
Professional media critics writing in the Freedom Forum Media Studies 
Journal acknowledge that online critics and news gatherers are presenting a 
challenge to the professional news media that can lead to their overthrow 
when they write: "News organizations can weather the blasts of professional 
media critics, but their credibility cannot survive if they lose the trust 
of the multitude of citizens critics throughout the United States."(47) 

     As more and more people come online, and realize the grassroots power 
of becoming a Netizen reporter, the professional news media must evolve a 
new role or will be increasingly marginalized.  

Endnotes 

   1. Christopher Lasch, "Journalism, Publicity, and the Lost Art of
      Argument," Media Studies Journal, Vol 9 no 1, Winter 1995, p. 81.
   2. Ibid.
   3. Ibid., p. 91.
   4. Jared Sandberg, "Oklahoma City Blast Turns Users Onto Internet for
      Facts, Some Fiction," Wall Street Journal, April 20, 1995, p. A6.
   5. Martha Fitzsimon and Lawrence T. McGill, "The Citizen as Media
      Critic," Media Studies Journal, Vol 9 no 2, Spring 1995, p. 91.
   6. Ibid.
   7. Thomas S. Volovic, "Encounters Online," Media Studies Journal, Vol 9
      no 2, Spring 1995, p. 115.
   8. Ibid.
   9. Bart Ziegler and Jared Sandberg, "Online Snits Fomenting Public
      Storms," Wall Street Journal, December 23, 1994.
  10. From: Gloria Stern
      Date: 7 April 1995
      Subject: Re: Future of print journalism
      Newsgroups: alt.journalism
  11. From: John Pike
      Date: 24 April 1995
      Subject: Re: Usenet's political power (was Re: Content Providers  
      Professionals versus Amateurs on Usenet)
      Newsgroups: alt.culture.usenet
  12. From: Elizabeth Fischer
      Date: 20 July 1994
      Subject: Re: TIME Cover Story: pipeline to editors
      Newsgroups: alt.internet.media-coverage
  13. From: Jim Zoes
      Date: 22 July, 1994
      Subject: Re: Time Cover Story: pipeline to editors
      Newsgroups: alt.internet.media-coverage
  14. Ibid.
  15. Ibid.
  16. From: Catherine Stanton
      Date: 21 July 1994
      Subject: Re: Time Cover Story: pipeline to editors
      Newsgroups: alt.internet.media-coverage
  17. From: Abby Franquemont-Guillory
      Date: 22 July 1994 13:45:19 -0500
      Subject: Re: Time Cover Story: pipeline to editors
      Newsgroups: alt.internet.media-coverage
  18. From: The Nutty Professor
      Date: Mon, 16 Jan 1995 13:35:34 GMT
      Subject: Re: Reporter Seeking Net-Abuse Comments
      Newsgroups: alt.internet.media-coverage
  19. From: Mikez
      Date: Tue, 25 Apr 95 03:58:55 GMT
      Subject: Re: Mass media exploiting 'cyberspace' for ratings
      Newsgroups: alt.journalism.criticism
  20. From: Wesley Howard
      Date: 8 Apr 1995 05:39:43 GMT
      Subject: Re: Does Usenet have an effect on the print news media?
      Newsgroups: alt.internet.media-coverage
  21. From: John DeHoog
      Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 20:01:24 +0900
      Subject: Make journalists get an e-mail address!
      Newsgroups: alt.journalism
  22. Message-Id: <elknox.35.00091823@bsu.idbsu.edu>
  23. Ibid.
  24. Delores Dege, "Re: Impact of the Net on Society," e-mail message, 21 
      February 1995.
  25. From: Keith L. Cowing
      Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 12:33:23 -0500
      Subject: Re: Content Providers   Professionals versus Amateurs on
      Usenet
      Newsgroups: alt.culture.internet
  26. From: William Logan Lee
      Subject: Re: Is hobby computing dead? (was Creative
      Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers
  27. From: Lisa Pease
      Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 23:17:24 GMT
      Subject: Re: Future of print journalism
      Newsgroups: alt.journalism
  28. From: Norman
      Date: 20 Mar 1995 21:05:54 -0500
      Subject: Re: Impact of the Net on Society
      Newsgroups: alt.culture.internet
  29. From: John Pike
      Date: 17 Apr 1995 12:21:49 GMT
      Subject: Content Providers   Professionals versus Amateurs on Usenet
  30. Ibid.
  31. Bart Ziegler and Jared Sandberg.
  32. Fara Warner, "Experts Surprised Intel Isn't Reaching Out To Con
      sumers More," Wall Street Journal, 14 December 1994.
  33. Bart Ziegler and Jared Sandberg.
  34. Ibid.
  35. From: John Hilvert
      Date: Wed, 5 Apr 1995 03:40:57 GMT
      Subject: Re: Does Usenet have an effect on the print news media?
      Newsgroups: alt.culture.usenet
  36. From: Miskatonic Gryn.
      Date: 17 Apr 1995 15:31:22 -0400
      Subject: Re: Cliff Stoll
      Newsgroups: alt.internet.media-coverage
  37. The number of people accessible via e-mail was placed at 27.5
      million as of October 1994 according to John Quarterman and MIDS at
      http://www.tic.com/mids/howbig.html
  38. From: Miskatonic Gryn.
  39. See John Kemeny, Man and the Computer, J.C.R. Licklider, "Man 
      Computer Symbiosis," Norbert Wiener, God & Golem, Inc.
  40. From: Karl A. Krueger
      Date: Mon, 27 Mar 1995 08:58:33 GMT
      Subject: Re: Special Issue of Time: Welcome to Cyberspace
      Newsgroups: alt.internet.media-coverage
  41. Ibid.
  42. Ibid.
  43. From: L. Todd Masco
      Newsgroups: news.future, comp.society.futures, ny.general 
      (No subject line)
  44. Karl A. Krueger.
  45. Ibid.
  46. Victor Hugo, Notre Dame de Paris, translated by John Sturrock,
      Penguin Books, London, 1978, p. 189.
  47. Fitzsimon and McGill, p. 201.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
     Reprinted from the Amateur Computerist Vol 7 no 2 Winter 1997
        available free via email from jrh@umcc.umich.edu and
                http://www.umcc.umich.edu/~jrh/acn
-----------------------------------------------------------------------