Fergus Cassidy

Culture vultures

SO it does turn out that the internet was just another fad. Up there with roller-blades and Filofaxes. At least that seems to be the perception from one side of the digital divide. Not the digital divide of the rich and poor - that's grown even more. There is a new digital divide that is more subtle.

Culture in the post-20th century world has abandoned subtlety and has embraced style over substance. It matters less these days how the drum is being banged. It greatly matters how loud it's being banged.

And that's the problem with the internet. It hasn't been able to compete with the noise levels coming from popular culture. Where the goings-on and antics of strangers locked in a house or the competitive aggression of wannabe pop stars are far more attractive than a dialogue with a stranger in a foreign land via email or Usenet.

The din of the cathode ray tube and the screaming headlines of the rich and famous have increased in influence and now largely define popular culture. What matters is not what is said, but who said it.

If the measurement for the influence of the internet so far is based purely on popular culture, then it has been an unadulterated flop. The existence of the internet will continue to shape the economic future landscape but it's influence on culture has been reduced to a trickle. Gone are the days when every newspaper and magazine had pages stuffed with web site reviews and general technology articles. Some were helpful but most adopted the first commandment of marketing: 'Thou shalt not be uncool'.

Cool was having a 'sexy' email address. Cool was visiting web sites that offered Christmas trees on 26 December. Cool was getting free stuff. Now cool is television ads for IBM denouncing cool. When mammoths like Big Blue do this then the net is on the run.

Recent figures in Ireland and Britain showing a major drop in students opting for computing and science at third level are part of this scenario. The end of the yellow brick dotcom superhighway may have signalled an end to big starting salaries and stock options. Why take a risk on something that the dogs in the street were barking was over?

But this was the 'new' generation wasn't it? Breast fed on computers and technology. The ones who were most comfortable with ones and zeros, who had none of the technophobia visited upon their clueless parents, who still dream that someday they will get the video recorder to work. Then again, maybe the e-generation (in more ways than one) have copped what was going on and saw through the WalkYourDog.com and its $300m stock market valuation. An Eircom generation who, fortunately for them, had better things to do with their money than stick it on the telecommunications sure thing. Watching 'the olds' (thanks Ross) squirm as the get-rich-quick scheme turned to dust may have opened their eyes to the reality of the future. Not to mention some cuts in their allowances courtesy of the tumbling share price.

Money for nothing and the clicks for free
The internet enjoyed only a momentary time in the sunshine of popular culture because it wasn't selling anything worthwhile. Okay, when business came on board about four years ago (seems like 40), there was a lot of selling, but it was still about selling nothing. The virtual shopping malls and other online businesses were going to change the way economics worked forever and the new economy was born.

Popular culture has been seriously hijacked. It is no longer an impression of popular moods or changes, but rather an expression of what's for sale - and everything is for sale. Whether it's public assets or private morality, there is a price tag. The trouble with the internet is that it has nothing to sell and having nowt to sell means the marketing and branding afficianados have steered well clear.

Besides selling nothing of worth as far as big business is concerned, the net is summarily dismissed as being not only yesterday's news, but also for containing tomorrow's troubles. Take the following comments last week from Arnaud de Borchgrave, a former editor-in-chief of The Washington Times and United Press International: "It is later than we think. The next generation of transnational terrorists understands that a hand on a mouse can be more lethal than a finger on a trigger". So not only is the net of no value, it also has to make room now for the terrorists. Which means the pornographers have to move over and make room.

So is this it then? The end of the revolution? Humanity's brief fling with two-way text and image communication over in the blink of an eye. It would seem so, but then the same arguments were also made about every new communications technology. The telephone, and particularly the fax, were prone to similar soothsayings of doom and destruction. The typewriter, the printed word and yes (deep breath) the television were all dismissed at one time as agents of harm.

What helped them along was the many ways in which they helped make the world a better place by enabling communication. They all had a clear, and in some cases emphatic, public service dimension, something that the internet has so far been unable to get even a toehold for itself. It is not that none exists, it's just that the unique contribution that the internet can make is being muffled by louder voices who use privately-owned communications media to present their agenda by passing it off as culture.

The internet cannot entertain in a way that is acceptable to mass marketing and branding. That facility belongs exclusively to the entertainment industry, which has become the denigrator-in-chief of the internet. But is the telephone a purely entertainment tool? Its low score on the entertainment scale is not a valid reason for its dismissal.

The fledgling internet's great strength so far is its ability to educate, inform and share common experiences. Areas in which it is extremely difficult to calculate future consequences at so early a stage.

As Justin Trudeau said at the recent World Computer Congress: "When we talk about the problems facing young people, the big one is a sense that they might not matter; they're not really allowed to participate in the creation of this world that they know they're going to inherit."

If he's right, then the world may not have heard the last from the e-generation.