A Map of the Network Society – notes P1 P2 P3 P4 P5 P6 Question: will the Internet make divisions between haves and have

-nots worse the Internet just a tool – can be used for good (including solving social problems) or bad people without internet access being left behind; to change world for the better, necessary to help them internet record conversations and allows many to read (& hear) the Internet = an environment for profit & non-profit + shared by people of all ages & interests allows bad & good info / not serious & serious issues to be discussed / connects people easily at a distance / helps the oppressed spread info P7 Internet access NOT a human right / should be left to private industry to spread / with access must come educ. to use properly P8 P9 P10 P11 P12 gov’t should subsidize use if necessary but, if owned, desire to control it too strong people will not get ahead simply by gaining Internet access / ability to think well important Internet access + education important role for society + free press & uncensored info Internet’s decentralized educ. good / cost of subsidies spread widely (taxes????) computers & Internet important for educ. but not able to replace teachers & family for moral & social educ. P13 in future more people work & study from home / work more rewarding, less damaging to environment, & more productive / workers more transient & less loyal  however, loyalty gained by having good coworkers P14 P15 P16 work will be more variable / good for some / difficult or impossible for others educ. of computer literates important  life-long learning important computer-illiterate problematic  Internet gives supplemental educ. & helps job-seekers / community networks cheap and useful P17 Internet creates global marketplace  those not connected disadvantaged  ability to speak English essential P18 P19 P20 P21 P22 P23 gov’t must help citizens connect  leads to higher salaries & better lives / censorship leads to poverty Central and Eastern Europe literate society able to connect relatively easily Western Europe complacent  not focused on usefulness of Internet Example: tech problem in Poland Example: tech problem in Poland solved  internet very useful those connected in E. Europe able to participate in world economy / most people not yet connected (but can participate????) P24 solution to digital disconnect  computers in school  children will learn quickly odd slap at illiterates in Paris or sweatshops in 3rd World

A Map of the Network Society In “A Map of the Network Society. she does not want Internet access to be seen as a universal human right in the way that education is seen to be. so the middle and upper class will subsidize (give) it all to the poor anyway through their governments. Dyson’s essay is oddly disjointed and full of contradictions. However. A Map of the Network Society – Critique In “A Map of the Network Society. if anything.” Esther Dyson suggests that government control of the Internet. either as an owner or gatekeeper. encouraging cost-effective investment and competition” (Para 7). The author provides an example of how the Internet is helping by trumpeting “The good news is that [the Internet] lets the elite…join in the world economy. However. The locals still do not have the commercial experience. She does not want the government to just give people Internet access. However. she wants people to receive governmentfunded education in how to use the Internet well. The author seems to imply in her opening paragraphs that she will be looking at how to help Internet have-nots get connected so that they will not be left behind intellectually and economically. this suggestion is highly unlikely to be successful because any business that is making large amounts of money from government subsidies will not worry much about cost-effectiveness and competition. it should not be seen as a universal human right. In addition. The poor will be unable to pay much.” It is unclear why she decouples education and its most efficient delivery system – a system which she praises over and over for its ability to deliver and supplement education. Her solution is to allow the government – through its taxpayers – to give money to private Internet service providers in the shape of subsidies because “the best way to foster the Internet is to allow it to grow commercially. business practices and infrastructure they need to . it should not be seen as a universal human right. while she believes that Internet access is important if the underprivileged are to get ahead. Dyson believes that society (through government subsidies) should provide education in how to use the Internet and it should use the Internet as a means of providing further education. Dyson believes that society (through government subsidies) should provide education in using the Internet and it should use the Internet as a means of providing further education. The author feels that Central and Eastern Europe have an advantage in developing computer-literate societies because they are already literate.” why should universal access to the Internet not be seen as a human right? In Paragraph 15. she states. and she wants the Internet to provide education. either as an owner or gatekeeper. “Education will bear the burden of training people to operate in this new world.” Esther Dyson suggests that government control of the Internet. is harmful and that. If “[e]ducation works best in the decentralized way fostered by the Internet. ending with a rather mean-spirited comparison of Eastern Europeans to illiterate French dropouts and to Third World children. is harmful and that. The author feels that Central and Eastern Europe have an advantage in developing computer-literate societies because they are already literate. It is a very difficult read. One could ask what the difference is between “giving” and ensuring that “the cost of access [is] spread broadly so that equal opportunities are available to all” (Para11). For a professional writer with extensive knowledge in her field. while she believes that Internet access is important if the underprivileged are to get ahead. she never effectively addresses this issue.

she discusses how the Internet will force people to have numerous jobs and how this may cause them to lack company loyalty. Dyson does not suggest any actionable ideas for helping the average adult in Eastern Europe. Her conclusion that Eastern Europeans will do better at becoming computerliterate than “the illiterate dropout in Paris” is quite offensive.” Yet. Dyson’s essay is full of distractions. Even if it is true that Third World children lack education. this essay was a difficult. Dyson makes a number of statements that are somewhat offensive. “We should be asking how to help those still left behind. her solution addresses the future. She makes no attempt to reconcile the contradictions. it is a cruel and unnecessary statement. . this point does not support her thesis. in Paragraph 13. This insensitivity is perhaps not surprising. In addition. This “solution” completely ignores the millions of adults who need to be helped NOW. it does not address those who are “still” left behind. Many men would disagree with this assertion. one would compare the average Eastern European to the average French citizen – not an illiterate dropout unless implying that the average French person is an illiterate dropout – nor would one offer that any solution to the computer-literacy gap in Eastern Europe is not applicable to a have-not “sweatshop child of the Third World” because of the superiority of Eastern European children. She states in Paragraph 2. Normally. Dyson’s digression to the importance of actual living. All in all. Keeping in mind that the purpose of the essay seems to be how to get internet access to have-nots. unpersuasive solution to the gap between Internet haves and have-nots. but at least they can be part of things” (Para 23). While it is certainly true that teachers and parents are important.compete on an equal basis. This seems to contradict earlier praise that the Internet will allow people to work from their homes. This is a rather condescending statement. breathing teachers in their roles “as role models. Even if one accepts that solutions need to be tailored to particular countries or regions. mentors and motivators” and the idea that children “need to get the basics of their moral and social education from their own families” (Para 12) is unnecessary. In addition to the contradictions. The author offers a solution in Paragraph 24 of putting computers in schools so that the children will learn. Her suggestion in Paragraph 1 that people ask her questions about social issues because she is a woman supports a stereotype that women are more attuned to social issues than men. then she goes on to discuss how the best way to keep employees is to surround them with good people. Perhaps most oddly. The average people are not part of her Internet revolution – only the elite.