|
"...
Millions of Americans are ... tired of the spam that's flooding their
in-boxes ... aggressive advertisements that won't quit."
"Various
technological and legal remedies have been developed. But many of the
proposed 'cures' are apt to damage cyberspace more than improve it."
"A
communications system that allows only certain incoming messages
undermines the Internet's vital expansive spirit. E-mails with valuable
content ... can run afoul of Internet service providers that start acting
like censors."
"...Legalistic moves against unfettered outreach to others via the
Internet could easily turn repressive while stifling free speech."
"The
spamming of America is not some strange anomaly that's perverting a
wondrous technology. It has many precedents."
"In 1928,
the Federal Radio Commission -- predecessor of today's FCC -- acknowledged
that 'advertising is usually offensive to the listening public.'"
"Many
Americans were repelled by the new phenomenon of blaring commercials.
'Radio broadcasting is threatened with a revolt of listeners,' Business
Week declared in 1932."
"...
the Internet is merely catching up with many other realms of our daily
lives."
"The real
indication of commercialism's insidious success is not so much that it
bothers people as that it doesn't."
|
|
By now, millions of Americans are sick and
tired of the spam that's flooding their in-boxes
with unwanted e-mail messages -- mostly offering
products, services and scams that tell of big
bargains, implausible windfalls, garish porno and dumb scenarios for
bodily enhancements. In 2003, we're routinely slogging through
large amounts of junk e-mail.
These are aggressive advertisements that won't quit. They're
doing a lot to pollute the Internet environment.
Various technological and legal remedies have been developed.
Filters on e-mail programs can screen messages. Some servers try to
limit mass e-mailings. Legislators propose crackdowns on spamsters.
But many of the proposed "cures" are apt to damage cyberspace more
than improve it.
A communications system that allows only certain incoming
messages -- perhaps just those sent by people we've heard from
before or think we want to hear from again -- undermines the
Internet's vital expansive spirit. E-mails with valuable content
(and who is to judge?) can run afoul of Internet service providers
that start acting like censors. And legalistic moves against
unfettered outreach to others via the Internet could easily turn
repressive while stifling free speech.
Overall, the most likely scenario for the spam problem is that
it will keep getting worse. And we'll
continue to do what we've already started to do
-- get used to it.
The spamming of America is not some strange anomaly that's
perverting a wondrous technology. It has many precedents.
Nearly a century ago, for instance, radio was a new grassroots
phenomenon that responded to community needs without huckstering
the listeners. Between
the First World War and the early 1930s, however,
much of radio went from small-scale, locally-based stations to
"chain stations." As the dollar signs grew bigger in radioland,
federal authorities sided with the era's corporate broadcasters
while cutting back on the hours and watts of nonprofit stations run
by colleges, labor unions, civic organizations and religious
groups.
Initially, few people assumed that the airwaves should transmit
commercials. And when the ads began to proliferate, a lot of people
didn't like what they heard. In 1928, the Federal Radio
Commission -- predecessor of today's FCC -- acknowledged that
"advertising is usually offensive to the listening public."
Many Americans were repelled by the new phenomenon of blaring
commercials. "Radio broadcasting is threatened with a revolt of
listeners," Business Week declared in 1932. The magazine added:
"Newspaper radio editors report more and more letters of protest
against irritating sales ballyhoo."
But commercials on the radio -- and then, starting at
mid-century, on television -- became
facts of media life. The airwaves had been
hijacked by corporations, which used their
ill-gotten gains to turn broadcast outlets into advertising-driven
cash cows.
During the past decade, the Internet has undergone a similar
transformation. Yes, there are ways to dodge spam, navigate between
pop-up ads and surf past the more obnoxious manifestations of
cyber-shilling on the Web. But the commercialization of the
Internet seems inexorable, and every year finds
cyberspace more severely afflicted by
advertising than the year before.
In the midst of the Internet's commercial descent, the anger
that some people feel about it is understandable. But here's a
reality worth pondering: While there's outrage as more and more
spam and other profit-fixated gunk keeps
appearing on our computer screens, the Internet
is merely catching up with many other realms of
our daily lives.
We rarely question the ongoing presence of advertisements on
television and radio (including the "enhanced underwriter credits"
on PBS and NPR) as well as on billboards, clothes and a vast array
of other available surfaces. We expect ads to come at us every time
we pick up a newspaper or magazine. For a price, sporting events
and stadiums are named for corporations. And on
and on. The branded life seems to be spreading
wherever we turn. And commercialism never
recedes -- it only expands, cheapening perceptions of life by
equating money with "worth" and possessions with happiness and
attractiveness.
The real indication of commercialism's insidious success is not
so much that it bothers people as that it doesn't. We've gotten
accustomed to the assault. And now we're getting used to the
incessant intrusions on personal computers.
What's happening to the Internet is what's been happening all
around us. But that's no cause for complacency. On the contrary.
____________________________________________
For The Juicy Cerebellum's
in-depth take on the SPAM debate, click here.
|