Information and the State – Part 4 – “Access to information” – Nov. 27, 2002

Overview of lecture:

1. What is involved in discussing "access to information"?
2. The use of a "what-if scenario" to think about possibilities
3. “Have / Have-nots” and “Have / Have-laters”
4. How could more access be achieved in a "have / have-later" scenario? How is it being achieved?

***********

1. What is involved in discussing "access to information"?

"Data protection law generally embodies"provisions giving data subjects the right of access to information about them. There is also, however, a much broader issue concerning access to information and the "right" of the citizen to be informed by the state."

Feather's point: because of computers, governments can accumulate and store more information and IN PRINCIPLE make citizens’ access to it easier.

But we know from earlier discussion (see #4612 in film library) about the technological problems involved in access: storing all this data on outmoded storage devices and the costs associated with transferring data to newer hardware.

1. Why need access to information? As study guide for “Into the Future” film notes: "[We] can"t have democracy unless government is accountable to people. [We] need documents to show people that government acted according to laws and policies."

So we need laws that allow us procedures to access the information PLUS we need govt. commitment to spending to ensure that the information is there in a form that can be retrieved.-

AS well, now that some of this information is theoretically accessible via the Internet, we need assurances that all citizens can access this information via this technology.

2. Johnson's use of "what-if" access scenario (from Computer Ethics "The social implications of computers: Autonomy and Access", 2000)

Johnson frames the discussion by imagining what our public policies might now look like:

"if we had considered personal information as part of the infrastructure of our society and that we manage it accordingly. We might do well to think generally about computer technology as infrastructure, and then manage its development, distribution, and integration to maximize positive effects, minimize negative effects, and gain efficiencies." (p. 43)

"What-if": if we could go back to the early days of the development of computers and put in place the "right" computer policies, what policies would we put in place?

Johnson suggests that we might well :

-"change property law to make more public domain software
-invest in a national public network
-establish a personal information utility
-ensure that all citizens have access to computers" (page 43).

3. When we talk about access, we refer to information "haves / have-nots"
BUT as Johnson points out, with all resources there have always been discussions about "haves and have nots"; cars, medical advances go to wealthy first. Are computers any different?

3.1. How measure “haves / have-nots” vis à vis access to information?

One way is to talk about world-wide Internet access and then when considering the whole world we have to step back and realize that :

"[f]or most of the world, the phone is not an accessible technology. It is literally true that half the world"s population is waiting to make its first phone call." (Disconnected: Haves and Have Nots in the Information Age, 1996, p. 125)

3. 2. A more realistic way to contrast the 3rd world with the 1st world is to consider them in a "have / have not" situation, and the 1st world in a "have / have-later" situation

4. How could access be achieved in a "have / have-later" scenario?

4.1. Ideally, in considering goals of access to the Internet for NORTH AMERICANS, everyone would have:

- place to go to get access to Internet with full range of features;
-software and hardware easy to use and fitting needs of ALL users (e.g., disabled);
-simple training available;
-pricing structured so that cost not a factor in denying anyone access.
(according to Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility) http://www.cpsr.org/

4.2. To what extent are some of the goals of universal access achieved already in our capitalist market-driven economy?

by technical developments?:

- e.g., typical home computer today 1000"s Xs better than Apple I. (measured by speed, amount of memory, and software available; cost about the same)
-online access about cost of monthly telephone service

by the market?

Normally the markets provide opportunities for people to use a product or service if they can"t afford to buy one (e.g., coin laundry, car rentals, )

by Volunteer contributions to schools, etc.? (e.g. Gates' philanthropy donating computers to schools, etc.)

--> BUT see Johnson's comments on the capitalist economy; "things are not produced unless there is someone to pay for them." Disabled, unemployed, etc. don't have money." (Page 47)