The panel of four discussing and debating modes of communication from Gutenberg to the internet brought a multitude of opinions on the implications such things have had on society and free speech.
One important discussion was the impact that changing technology, especially the internet, have had on politics. Dr. Knecthtle argued that the internet was not a new force to handle but simply amplified existing forces in communication; it is only a new and improved, stronger way for citizens to engage with the political process. For many, this raised questions of the voting process in America and what the internet could do to reinvent the most important part of civic engagement. Dr. Knecthtle stated there were still too many kinks for such a system to work, such as a lack of security and the unequal distribution of technology. The internet is bringing many new opportunities for citizens in the political process and helping to open the field and disperse power- it is no longer a strictly hierarchical system. With such access, many opposition powers are gaining momentum and a wide audience, from the Tea Party to groups like MoveOn.org. The internet is not going to force itself upon a community or country however, as Dr. Knecthtle stated “political culture must want it.”
But what sort of negative impact can the government have on this open form of communication? From a German perspective and Dr. Keber’s point of view, certain introduced legislation may allow gatekeepers to censor information without the due process of rights- infringing on the free speech of many citizens.
The changing forms of technology in the recent centuries have introduced the on going argument of the freedom of speech versus the freedom of information. But this is not a new issue, Dr. Weaver argued that we must rethink how we approach an exisitng problem. Scholar Ben Shepherd agreed: “What this panel discussion illustrates is that the questions and problems associated with free speech have changed little from the Renaissance to the present. While the means through which we communicate ideas change as to scale and scope, the ideas themselves do not.” It is a battle with no clear cut solution and will be interesting to watch evolve in the decades to come.
As senior McConnell scholar Hunter Davis summed up, “While the advancement of technologies regarding the press have advanced dramatically from the time of Gutenberg to the modern age these have not been without their challengers to the free press hopefully as the availability of theses types of media increase the fundamental right of free press will be available to all.”
One important discussion was the impact that changing technology, especially the internet, have had on politics. Dr. Knecthtle argued that the internet was not a new force to handle but simply amplified existing forces in communication; it is only a new and improved, stronger way for citizens to engage with the political process. For many, this raised questions of the voting process in America and what the internet could do to reinvent the most important part of civic engagement. Dr. Knecthtle stated there were still too many kinks for such a system to work, such as a lack of security and the unequal distribution of technology. The internet is bringing many new opportunities for citizens in the political process and helping to open the field and disperse power- it is no longer a strictly hierarchical system. With such access, many opposition powers are gaining momentum and a wide audience, from the Tea Party to groups like MoveOn.org. The internet is not going to force itself upon a community or country however, as Dr. Knecthtle stated “political culture must want it.”
But what sort of negative impact can the government have on this open form of communication? From a German perspective and Dr. Keber’s point of view, certain introduced legislation may allow gatekeepers to censor information without the due process of rights- infringing on the free speech of many citizens.
The changing forms of technology in the recent centuries have introduced the on going argument of the freedom of speech versus the freedom of information. But this is not a new issue, Dr. Weaver argued that we must rethink how we approach an exisitng problem. Scholar Ben Shepherd agreed: “What this panel discussion illustrates is that the questions and problems associated with free speech have changed little from the Renaissance to the present. While the means through which we communicate ideas change as to scale and scope, the ideas themselves do not.” It is a battle with no clear cut solution and will be interesting to watch evolve in the decades to come.
As senior McConnell scholar Hunter Davis summed up, “While the advancement of technologies regarding the press have advanced dramatically from the time of Gutenberg to the modern age these have not been without their challengers to the free press hopefully as the availability of theses types of media increase the fundamental right of free press will be available to all.”