- A globalised world and networking
- So what should we do with the new technologies?
- Act now, before it is too late

Why should we, as citizens, become involved in ICT policymaking? The obvious answer is that, as shown above, ICTs are so central to contemporary society that they affect us continually in many ways. So, for example, if a government decides to promote free software, we are more likely to enjoy the benefits of free software (better security, lower cost, easy adaptation to local conditions and needs, etc). This is because it will be more extended throughout society, the monopoly of Microsoft software and its file formats will be broken, and our lives will improve. If a government decides to introduce a new form of censorship on the internet, or fails to protect citizens’ rights to privacy, then we will suffer too. If the telephone companies keep prices artificially high for broadband, or refuse to introduce a cheap flat rate for modem access, then we may have to pay too much to access the internet, the same as everyone else. If telecommunications companies are not encouraged or obliged by regulation to roll out services in rural areas, people there will have to rely on more expensive mobile phone services. If governments do not make it legal for wireless internet services to operate, development and community workers in ‘unconnected’ parts of the world will not be able to benefit from the power of online communication and information access. The internet makes it possible for local voices to be heard throughout the world but, if policy and regulation limit their access, they will also limit their reach.

These self-interested reasons are not the main ones. Other reasons have to do with the nature of global society. If we want to promote social justice, then ICT policy will be a key factor in this battle, and we cannot afford to remain outside the ICT policy-making process.

A globalised world and networking

Globalisation is a historical reality, not just a catch phrase. The world we live in has changed enormously in the last 15 to 20 years. Whilst a global economy has existed in some form for centuries, in the form of colonialism and world trade, the new form of unregulated exploitation has taken shape in the last decade and has been promoted particularly by some economists in the UK and the US (for example the Chicago School economists). An offensive was launched to give companies freedom to invest where and how they liked. The basis of the new economy was free trade, unrestricted investment, deregulation, balanced budgets, low inflation and privatisation of government-owned enterprises and infrastructures. At the same time, restrictions on the world financial market were lifted and this became the flag-bearer of the globalisation offensive. A large number of mergers and company takeovers meant that many industries became dominated by a few multinationals, and the smaller, local companies went under or were forced to depend on the larger ones.

ICTs have been a fundamental part of this process. Without instantaneous, global, electronic telecommunications, the world financial market could not exist, nor could companies coordinate their production strategies on a global level. Today’s competition between companies depends on such global communications, as does the production of new ideas and research, whether at universities, private institutes or company laboratories. Although it is not true to say that ICTs have caused these radical changes, they have been a prerequisite and are now fundamental to the functioning of the global economy.

Manuel Castells, in his three-volume work on the information age¹
, has suggested that this modern, globalised, deregulated and privatised form of capitalism is not only based on modern ICTs, but on the forms of social organisation that these permit: networks. A networked society is one in which “the entire planet is organised around telecommunicated networks of computers at the heart of information systems and communication processes.”²
This dependence on the power of information reaches us all. Furthermore, “the availability and use of information and communication technologies are a prerequisite for economic and social development in our world. They are the functional equivalent of electricity in the industrial era.” Castells goes so far as to state that ICTs can allow countries to “leapfrog stages of economic growth by being able to modernise their production systems and increase their competitiveness faster than in the past.”³
Whether or not one shares his optimism for the possibility of ICTs furthering social development, he develops a compelling case that this modern economic and social system is not only the most productive one ever but also the most exclusionary. What, and who, it does not need, it casts aside. If you are not part of the networking system, then you are excluded and forced to survive on the outskirts of it, marginalised, powerless and poor. While the powerful use networks to go beyond the traditional restrictions of space and time, most people all over the world cannot. People, workers, citizens, do not function on a day-to-day level in a global network, but at a local level in a closer human web of human relationships.

The conclusion is clear: we have to use the networks in a new way, for the benefit of human beings and not for the efficient functioning of the international money market and multinational companies.⁴
If global, networked systems are the new basis of power, and if ICTs are the technical foundation of globalisation, they became a terrain of struggle. The main challenge is to adapt them to become the technical foundation of the struggle against the negative impacts of globalisation and for social justice. Those who remain inside the networked society, with access to the systems that make it function so effectively, will be able to fight to change it. Those who are excluded will find it so much more difficult.

So what should we do with the new technologies?

What does this mean in practice? It means using ICTs to do several things. First, to spread alternative information in a new way, to millions of people instantly and without the confines of traditional limitations such as distance. Second, to create new forms of organisation and coordination, new structures and new modes of operation. Third, to foster new forms of solidarity among the powerless, new ways of sharing experience and of learning from one another. And finally, to incorporate more and more people into these alternative global networks.
People are already doing it. The Web allows anybody to publish news and information, and the effects of this can be seen everywhere, not just on the millions of websites that anyone can access. No longer can the powerful tell lies and get away with it so easily. For example, when a politician justifies a war with lies, alternative versions immediately appear on thousands of electronic mailing lists, websites, blogs, and internet radio and TV. Websites like the Indymedias provide alternative sources of information, which are instantaneous, open to the participation of anyone who has interesting news, and where information, opinion and debate coexist. Information can now be made available instantly all over the Web. This forces the traditional media, such as the mainstream press and TV, to respond, changing the style of information gathering but showing, as they compete for momentary exclusives and news-breaking stories, that their news and information are still controlled by the editors, the directors, and frequently the owners. Counter information on the internet is usually unpaid, and allows other viewpoints to be heard.

But it is not only the information flows that are changing. The way we work together is also changing. New tools allow new ways of organising, often without the vertical hierarchies, rigidly formal structures and entrenched office bearers that previously allowed those who controlled the information flows to control the structures. A mailing list makes it just as easy to send a message to hundreds or even thousands of people as to one person. When activities are organised through a list, everyone can have all the information, not just chosen bits. Thus a coalition of activists can be not just a few representatives who go to a meeting once a week, but hundreds of people who can voice their ideas. A campaign for mass demonstrations, or to protest a political trial, can quickly involve thousands of people in a matter of weeks, when previously it would have taken months or years. This makes grassroots-organising easier, allows more people to be involved, but also may mean that the political structures that are developed in this manner are not so stable as they used to be. A network may develop for a particular campaign, involve a dozen, hundreds or thousands of people, and then dissolve or change into another form when the campaign finishes.

One challenge faced by those working for social justice in the era of globalisation is how to operate on a global scale, to link people and communities in different countries around causes that affect us all. Apart from email and mailing lists, web forums, news groups, intranets, online group work spaces, webs, blogs, videoconferences, instant messenger services, and a host of new tools mean that the possibilities for international, national or local collaboration are infinitely greater with the new technologies. In the same way that injustice has become globally organised, the struggle against it must be global, not only local. This means that people from rich countries can learn from those from poorer countries, and vice versa. Of course, ICTs are no substitute for real, face-to-face interaction, but when this is not possible they can pro-vide alternatives. And they often make closer human communication easier by bringing people together.

But to use the new ICTs in these ways, you need to be able to access them, and most of humanity cannot do so at the moment. Access to ICTs for all is thus a key demand for concerned citizens, an essential aspect of ICT policy, and an issue for us all.

The new technologies offer enormous possibilities for increasing human freedom and social justice. The origin of the internet, designed as a way of collaborating without any central control, makes it an excellent tool for this, and because the internet has developed in an unregulated way on the basis of collaboration, it is not controlled. Not yet. But this situation is unlikely to last. In fact, it is under threat from governments and multinational companies, through legislation, regulation, monopoly control, legal pressures, and intellectual property restrictions. The new ICTs will not be new for very long, and they might not continue to be as free as they are now. The possibilities they offer can be taken away from us, unless we actively participate in the inevitable regulatory process that any new technology experiences.

Act now, before it is too late

Now is the time to act, when all is not yet decided. If we wait until the restrictions on ICTs are consolidated, it will be much more difficult to reverse policies than to create better ones in the first place. Policy varies from country to country, especially from rich to poor, and the priorities are different. In poorer countries, where ICTs are less developed, the key issues are access to ICTs for the majority of the population and outright restrictions such as internet filters and lack of freedom of expression. In the developed countries, many of these issues have already been decided, such as telephone access, or have a long tradition, such as the lack of censorship. But new issues are arising as restrictions are imposed: privacy, censorship, intellectual property restrictions, broadband, 3G cell phones, wireless connectivity, infrastructure monopolies, media concentration, etc. The result of these new struggles to impose the power of governments and multinationals will inevitably be extended to the rest of the world, so people in less developed countries should actively engage with these issues, because their future will be decided for them.

So why should we be interested in ICT policy? Because the way ICTs develop will have an enormous impact on the possibilities of working for social justice and sustainable development. If we do not take an active part in ICT policy-making, we will have no say in how our societies develop and how the future unfolds.

1M. Castells, The Rise of the Network Society, End of Millennium and The Power of Identity, 1996-2000.

2Information Technology, Globalization and Social Development, 1999,