Computers and networks are nothing new. They have
existed and business applications
such as LAN and EDI are well established long before the World Wide Web took over. Then, why is the sudden talk of the Digital Age and the advance of electronic commerce?
(1) allows two-way communications, and
(2) is built around open standards.
A two-way
communication means targeting audience and the possibility of feedback. Broadcasting
sends out messages to "no one in particular" and without knowing
quite who has gotten the message. (What
do Nielson and a horde of market research firms
do for their living?) An open standard (e.g. TCP/IP) means interoperability and
the advantage of a large market and
the possibility of integrating one product or process with another.
Both of these
characteristics are being challenged.
I. To the WebTV generation, the digital future
looks like another version of the passive one-way broadcasting. The "new media" sums up how publishers and media companies view the digital medium. We are so accustomed to
"receiving random messages" that we often forget the fact that
broadcasting was a 20th century phenomenon. Even "interactive television" envisioned by today's media is a way
of providing a more lively entertainment, offering more information "related to existing contents" (e.g. detailed
information about characters, plots, and commercials shown on TV). Multichannel,
digital TV broadcasting may very
well be a model for future entertainment, but it needs to be remembered that it
is only one application of the digital
communications network.
II. The
commercialization of the Internet is
forcing businesses to differentiate
their products from others by making products
incompatible. Unlike the public Internet where standards were open, firms
attempt to capture and dominate the market with their proprietary products. In such an environment, TCP/IP would have had
a very slim chance of becoming a standard and opening up the digital, networked economy. Whether markets
driven by private interests can bring about a better result (e.g., more
efficient, technologically superior, etc. system) is still a concern left for
arguments.
Perhaps telephone networks are quite similar to
the Internet (and indeed most Internet
traffic goes through telephone networks). But unlike telephones, the
Internet's user interface (computers) is much more sophisticated and flexible. Because
of its beginning as a public research
network, the Internet has no pricing regime of telephone companies. The world-wide connection, then, may be
considered to have been an accident. When usage-based, long-distance charges
are implemented, the Internet may look quite similar to the telephone network.
