Australian Computer SocietyAustralian Computer SocietyThese are "slides", intended for display to an audience with an 18 point font on a 640 x 480 video display (or equivalent). Use the "<-Previous" and "Next->" links between slides. Following each "slide" are speakers notes, which don't appear on-screen if the arrow links are used.
In 1994 Tom Worthington co-authored, the Australian Computer Society's policy proposals on the "Networked Nation", which have influenced public policy by successive governments. In this talk Mr. Worthington will look at where Australia is now with public policy on the Internet and the web. He will argue that the new medium requires a new form of literacy. He might look at what the policies of the next Federal Government might need to be in to achieve the Networked Nation and current topical issues of digital TV, rural use of mobile telephones, funding for libraries and universities.
Contact: Larry Stillman, Diversity Officer, Vicnet - Network Services Division, State Library of Victoria, larrys@vicnet.net.au ph: 03 9669 9710 fax: 03 9669 9805/9728
This document is: http://www.acs.org.au/president/1998/past/newlt.htmDraft of 27 March 1998:
The content of this talk will be developed here. Suggestions and comments welcome: tom.worthington@tomw.net.au
>
>
The Australian Computer Society is the professional association in Australia for those in the computing and information technology fields. It was established in 1966. The Society has over 14,000 members and on a per capita basis is one of the largest computer societies in the world.
>
>
In 1994 the Australian Computer Society produced policy proposals on the "Networked Nation", which have influenced public policy by successive governments. These were written by Roger Clarke at the ANU, with help from myself. I circulated the drafts on-line for comment. Later I learnt that copies of the drafts were being downloaded by advisers in both Government and opposition ministerial offices, as well as agencies, industry and academia. As a result the ideas in the submission (and the title) were sublimated into policy even before the paper was submitted.
Even so what seemed obvious: that one scalable, on-line network ("the Internet") was possible and desirable was and still is continually sidetracked down technological and social blind alleys of "broadband" Pay TV cabling, CD-ROMs and most recently Digital TV.
>
The network nation of Australia is in good condition. We have Parliament, government, politicians and people on-line. This is not due to any grand strategy by government or the Parliament, but by grass roots activity by network enthusiasts at the grass roots level. Since 1994 I have been a member of the Internet Conspiracy, implementing networking and then waiting for Government to endorse it retrospectively. We have some, but too few government, community and industry leaders who understand and know how to use the technology.
>
Working on-line requires a new form of literacy. In some ways it combines the precision of writing, with the immediacy of radio or TV. In some ways the previous government got it right with an emphasis on multi-media content. However, they got it wrong by thinking that this would be a skill confined to a few experts, like film makers with CD-ROMs. These will be skills like reading, writing and speaking on a telephone, which all citizens will need. Through the ACS I have been able to explore, over the last few years, what that literacy might be. Even something as simple as writing a media release changes when you put it on-line and let the world read it. Education will also change and the ACS is helping re-educate IT professionals and managers via on-line Masters level courses.
>
While there is much to celebrate in the networked nation, there are many disappointments. A recent disappointment is the short sighted decision of the federal government on Digital TV. This decision, to lock Australia into an outmoded communications medium called "TV" is not in the public interest.
Over the next few years will see a repeat of the debacle with Pay TV. Analog Pay TV cable did not give us the information superhighway, nor will digital TV. The government is creating a regulatory nightmare by giving TV networks a digital broadcasting monopoly and then trying to limit them from using it for its most profitable and socially useful purposes. The answer to "what is the future of digital TV" is simple: "its the Internet, stupid".
The real issues which need to be addressed are in the ACS paper: equity of access (particularly in rural Australia) and education. The ACS and others have been addressing these issues in real, practical ways. I would invite Australia's politicians to join us to build the networked nation.
>