The future of the Internet

Future of the Internet

The internet has changed, and in many ways revolutionized, communication, commerce, and the daily activities and processes of individuals worldwide in the early 21 stcentury. The changes brought about by the internet and millions of people's widespread use of it are arguably positive; negative; or both, depending on one's own perspectives and viewpoints. As the six respective articles offering conflicting viewpoints about the internet also indicate, moreover, the internet itself presents (and will continue to present in the future) both good and bad realities, capabilities, and possibilities, within areas like information access; marketing; and communication. In this essay, I will explore the multiple viewpoints about the present and future of the internet, as expressed by the authors of these six "opposing viewpoints" authors, in the internet, and also offer my own opinions on the future of the internet.

Arguably, at least to some, the future of the internet represents the "democratization" of knowledge, e.g., that everyone worldwide (or at least those who can afford it, which is actually a relative few (see Dixit, "The World Will Serve the Internet's Elite")) will have access to information; advertising, etc. However, as Estabrook argues to this viewpoint in his article "Individuals Will Become Empowered by the Internet," the internet, in today's world, is actually tantamount to Gutenberg's printing press, ands therefore a positive force, in that it makes information that would otherwise reach only a small audience available instead to a great many.

Schenker, in "The Internet Will Spark a Communications Revolution" predicts that 'follow me anywhere services' (p. 170), like on demand car repair services whatever one's current location might be, and/or "buddy system" (p. 171) communications, "which alert people when their friends and relatives are on the Net and ready to chat" (Schenker), and various other internet-based technologies will also revolutionize the way people, groups, businesses, and other entities communicate day-to-day. McChesney, on the other hand ("Media Conglomerates Will Control the Internet") contends that such future technological advancements and capabilities will not be used democratically. Instead, as McChesney portends huge global corporate entities like Disney and AOL will simply come to dominate digital technologies, e.g., the internet, as they do most others today.

Not all six of the "opposing viewpoints" authors believe that the internet will radically change or has radically changed ordinary people's entrenched behavior patterns. For instance, Streitfield, in the article "Internet Retailers Will Revert to Traditional Methods of Commerce" describes how one web-based online shopping company, called "The Webhouse Club" (p. 185) failed after a short period of time, because this company could not figure out how to balance high customer demand (based on considerable discounting of products) with the company's own need to make a profit in order to continue to survive. Further, as Streitfield observes, consumers have no, even now, entirely embraced the idea of online shopping for new, unusual, or unfamiliar items, and instead prefer to purchase brand-name products familiar to them from their off-line shopping. Online companies, therefore, have struggled with the "balancing act" of discounting known products sufficiently to entice customers to buy them online, while still profiting themselves.

Another possible new internet inroad of the future, according to Hiltzik ("Traditional Phones Will Be Replaced by the Internet") is the telephone industry. The transition from telephone technology to less expensive internet technology predicted by Hiltzik, however, will "likely be slow because the phone system is more familiar, reliable, and ubiquitous" (p. 192). But economic realities, Hiltzik asserts, will eventually win out, as today's telephone customers become more and more used to the new internet telephone technology, and to the much cheaper telephone calling rates that it would allow. Already, Hiltzik adds, telephone companies like ATT are looking ahead by investing in such new internet technology. As all six of the "opposing viewpoint" authors observe, albeit in ways different from one another, internet uses of the future will change communication and commerce practices and individual lives even more than they have done already.

One thing that internet technology (or any technology, for that matter) does not, and cannot change, however is human nature. Human beings (of which corporations like Disney and AOL consist) are inclined to be competitive and monopolistic, and for that reason it is my own opinion that, as McChesney argues, corporate entities that already control so much of the entertainment industry will likely capture the digital entertainment and entertainment-related markets as well. I also agree with Dixit, too, that the internet is likely to be dominated, as it is now, by western rather than more diverse kinds of international cultural influences. The customized internet services that Schenker predicts, or closely similar ones, will likely also come into being and enjoy widespread popular use once they are available.

In these ways, then, individuals will indeed become empowered by the internet, as Eastabrook, for example, suggests. However, as Dixit also suggests, not all individuals (and/or groups or companies) will become as empowered as others, or be empowered in the same way as others. Therefore, depending on one's culture perspective and viewpoint, the internet may be a source of the democratization for some, while being, for others, just yet another instrument of social and cultural domination.