Date: Fri 10-Jul-1998

Publication: Bee

Author: CURT

Quick Words:

iinfo-Drudge-gentler-net

Full Text:

INTERNET INFO FOR REAL PEOPLE: Kinder Gentler Net?

By Bob Brand

Maybe you have noticed. Much of the mass media seems to have called a

moratorium on blaming the Internet for children gunning down their classmates,

El Nino, the GM strike, making sensitive technology transfers to the Chinese

military, and the high price of ice cream?

Has the Internet become a kinder, gentler place? Hardly! If anything, the

Internet still holds the mother lode of many headline-grabbing stories.

However, the press either ignores them or the subjects are handled with a

guarded circumspection.

More Dangerous

Than Ever

With an ever increasing number of people finding their way online, the Net

continues to reflect both positive and negative traits mirrored in the greater

population. The easy access of personalized communication with youngsters

using chat rooms and e-mail allows the Net to be the meeting place of choice

for predators and deviates of every stripe. Often, we can only find reports of

these incidents on the Net itself.

Make no mistake about it; unsupervised use of the Internet by children is a

recipe for disaster. Kip Kinkel and other notorious youth are capable of

finding home made bomb recipes on the Internet easier than ever.

Why aren't we hearing a greater number of sensationalized Internet stories on

nightly news broadcasts? David Plotnikoff, a reporter for Mercury News,

grappled with this question in early June. His conclusion: "When tens of

millions of parents, teachers, cops, lawmakers and news-gatherers began to

experience day-to-day life on the Net for themselves, the fear went away. The

other-ness of the Net went away. "They," were supplanted, by and large, by . .

. us. I do not think it is quite that simple. To a large extent, the press

shapes our perception of daily events. The gathering, editing and distribution

of news come with a cost. The media is encumbered with an ever-present

pressure of maintaining profitability supported by the backdrop of selling

advertising or video spots. If the mainstream news characterization of a "big

bad Internet" does not live up to the reality of what readers/viewers

experience, then reporters lose credibility. This factor is slipped into the

equation as more people venture into cyberspace.

When the first live birth was transmitted over the Internet, the story is not

about the event itself, but rather the delays in viewing the birth because of

insufficient bandwidth at the server. It, also, became newsworthy that the new

mother was wanted by the authorities in Orange County Florida on nine

misdemeanor warrants for writing bad checks.

Disturbing Revelations

The ascendance of Matt Drudge, perhaps the first high profile media-Net

personality, was met with early dismissal from almost all quarters of mass

media and White House news briefers. Eventually, the realization that Drudge

enjoys a large following was not lost on the media. While Drudge admits to

making his share of mistakes, he has made retractions quickly at fiber-packet

speed. The media has discussed the "Drudge phenomenon" since his reporting of

the Clinton/Lewinsky story. Drudge Report content has led to some

self-examination of story sources, honesty in journalism and other heady

subjects by the mainstream media.

Recently, two reporters, Stephen Glass and Patricia Smith were terminated from

high profile publications for their fabrications. Alan Dershowitz has publicly

accused Mike Barnicle of inventing quotes and events about him. April Oliver

and Peter Arnett are behind a false story about the use of Sarin nerve gas

against American defectors during the war in Vietnam. Their reports appeared

in Time magazine and on CNN, causing severe embarrassment along with

retractions. So far, Oliver and others have been terminated.

Those of us who elect to read Drudge's words know that he deals in gossip. The

information is factored into the evaluation of his articles we read. On the

other hand, if a reporter quotes a source, that person had better be alive and

uttered the words in print. If not, we must hold the reporter accountable. In

cyberspace, we must maintain a constant vigil on the source quality of the

information being reported. Taking something at face value could be a serious

mistake on the Internet. Frankly, that may not ever change. It is the nature

of the beast. The Net is neither kinder nor gentler.

URLs (Uniform Resource Locators) of interest:

http://www.mercurycenter.com/business/top/053701.htm

http://www.salonmagazine.com/media/1998/06/26media.html

http://www.wired.com/news/news/culture/story/13290.html

http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/9807/02/se.01.html

(This is the 111th of a series of elementary articles designed for surfing the

Internet. Next, The Changing Face of Spam is the subject on tap. Stay tuned.

Until next week, happy travels through cyberspace. Previous issues of Internet

Info for Real People (including links to sites mentioned in this article) can

be found: http://www.thebee.com. Please e-mail comments and suggestions to:

rbrand@JUNO.com or editor@thebee.com.)