Article Review

The article I have chosen to briefly talk about this week is regarding the privacy of Google’s Book search. There article is here; it’s short but the issue has been in the news for a few months now and certainly touches on the personal, professional, and private spaces of everyone who will use it (and by my judgment, I would say that a good many people would). The issue at hand is regarding a project by Google to catalog and make searchable/readable as may books as possible online. This includes out-of-print books from hundreds of years past as well as modern best-sellers.

I think the intention is a very good one; making as much information available to as many people as possible. I am an avid book lover (in both digital and print format) and support this initiative 100%. However, there have been some valid concerns raised regarding both copyright and privacy issues. The obvious copyright issues involve the rights of the authors and/or copyright holders. If all these copyrighted books are freely available, then how will authors get compensated? Google has proposed payment schemes based on the number of views of pages/books and the deal is still in the works (the Justice Dept. is involved as well).

However, of primary concern to myself is the issue of privacy. How will Google use the information gathered in my search and viewing habits of books (are these fundamentally different from my search habits)? Should the same privacy codes and laws (in Lessig’s sense) be in place for the new “architecture” of online book searching/viewing? Should it be even stronger given the additional avenues of exploitation possible on the Net? In the above article, a tentative privacy policy was introduced but many are concerned that it is not enough. If Google is permitted to sell, divulge or otherwise use personal book searching/viewing habits, then this definitely jeopardizes personal and professional privacy rights.

Application of Technology

I would like to discuss virtual worlds and the challenge of increasing community involvement in local government.

I think one of the big problems facing public administration and government in general is community involvement in local governance. As populations increase, true participatory government becomes an increasing problem. First, there is the sheer physical limitation of congregating and managing active participation of large communities. There are only so many people that can fit into a town hall or auditorium and only so much time to allocate for public comment. Second, as communities continue to become more culturally diverse, the number of differing opinions and interests also increases. Finally, and probably the most importantly, many people just don’t have the time.

Currently, there are really not many “approaches” being made to increase participation. Civic participation is as old as participatory government itself and aside from representative government, there have not been many changes to the process. Concerned people with a vested interest in their community come together to discuss things they want. While the approach to the process has not changed much, the attitudes of the people have changed dramatically. Civic engagement is no longer seen as a necessary and duty-based endeavor…at least not until something unpopular happens. Thanks in part to the Regan years where government was labeled as essentially “evil” (with some good cause), people have been falling more on the “conservative” side of the political spectrum in their criticism and withdrawal from participation (and support) with government. While there have recently been some attempts at using technology to increase participation by both government and activists (here, here,  here…and many others), I think “virtual worlds” has so much potential if properly harnessed.

Imagine a town hall meeting set in a virtual town hall in an architecture like Second Life. This town hall would have virtually unlimited space so everyone could be present at one. Access to this “town hall” is quick and easily available to anyone with an Internet connection. Through proper architecture and code, EVERYONE has the opportunity to participate through either chat or voice (in this instance, residents/votes can be verified through code). These “meetings” would not have to be limited by time but could be persistent online spaces where citizens can gather and contribute their ideas and concerns whenever they had the time. Government or party representatives (in the case of non-profits, activist groups, etc.) could facilitate the discussion across a number of days without concern for facility space, cost, or safety issues. When it is felt that a thorough discussion of the issues has been done, government representatives, through proper coding of this online world, could easily review all ideas, recommendations, and concerns and make well informed decisions as necessary. While Second Life is the example I am using here, I do believe that market forces could have a very large impact on the creation of architecture and code that would be ideal for this type of venue. While I personally would be against a private company basically “selling” an avenue of participatory government, I would imagine some virtual advertising would not be too out of line as a means of paying for this system.

The more I write about this concept (which has already been done…though not frequently), the more potential I see in it. I have only explored a few of the benefits in this short thought experiment but I think that it has the potential to radically change how participatory government works. While most governments have already embraced the digital revolution to some degree, I certainly feel that there is much more that can be done. Limiting online government interactions to paying fees and taxes (which is basically all the City of Phoenix does) is, while useful, a sad example of technology use relative to the potential. Hopefully in the near future, we will see better uses of technology to solve basic participatory government problems. I see virtual worlds as a viable and attractive solution.