Presented by Sue Bogren, Kevin Erlinger, Jan Hari, Pam Van Walleghen
This paper was written for EPS304:Ethical and Policy Issues in Information Technologies , College of Education, University of Illinois.
May 4, 1999
This paper explores the commercialization of the Internet and the ramifications for educators. The report contains background information that includes a brief history of the Internet and its commercialization, the benefits of commercialization, and current policy and government regulations. It also tackles thorny issues of interest to educators by addressing the invasive nature of commercialization and how advertising affects our students. Not all schools have the funding to be able to ignore free hardware, software, or access provided in exchange for advertising. Each school will have to examine it’s circumstances and make decisions based on its needs and community standards. By presenting an objective, well-balanced look at the issues, we hope to present information to ease that decision making process.
If the 1970's were a time of research, the 1980's were a time of development. The TCP/IP protocol was introduced in 1983, and at the University of Wisconsin the name server was developed. The next year domain name server (DNS) was established. In 1986, the National Science Foundation developed a system to connect the growing number of hosts. Regional networks were connected to a backbone network, which became known as the NSFNET. As the "Internet" continued to grow and prosper, ARPANET came to an end in 1989 (BBN Timeline, "http://www.bbn.com/roles/researcher/timeline/time80.htm") just before HTML protocol was introduced in 1990. HTML allowed graphics to be sent along with text to create hypertext pages customized to the sender's preference. (Internet History, "http://tdi.uregina.ca/~ursc/internet/history.html") Everything was now in place for explosive growth.
Commercial contractors have been involved in the development of ARPANET from its inception. As Tang and Teflon began as curiosities of the space program and later became common consumer products, so too have email, web research, and home shopping on the Web. It has only been ten years since the first relay between a commercial entity (MCI Mail) and the Internet was made. Since that time technologies have emerged that have fueled the growth of private enterprise on the Web. In 1992 Paul Linder and Mark McCahill at the University of Minnesota released Gopher, a tool that allowed researchers to retrieve specific data from myriad locations. The next year Mosaic, a web browser, was developed at the University of Illinois by Netscape founder Marc Andreesen, the World Wide Web became a public domain, and the Pentium processor was introduced by Intel to speed up the whole process. (The Past, Present, and Future of the Internet, "http://etrg.findsvp.com/timeline/history.html") As the technology advanced, the Internet became easier to use and the World Wide Web sites became more intricate and inviting. In 1994 shopping malls arrived on the Net. You could order pizza from Pizza Hut online or bank at First Virtual Bank, the first cyberbank. Of course, the advancements came with a downside. Vladimir Levin of Russia became the first publicly known Internet bank robber when he used the Internet to illegally transfer funds to his account. ("http://www.isoc.org/guest/zakon/Internet/History/HIT.html"Hobbes' Internet Timeline v4.1, "http://www.isoc.org/guest/zakon/Internet/History/HIT.html")
1995 saw the introduction of several emerging technologies such as JAVA and JAVAscript, Virtual Environments, and RealAudio which further enhanced the kind of product information which could be made available to consumers. Commercial users now outnumbered research and academic users by a two to one margin, and Bill Gates decided to redefine Microsoft as an Internet company. (The Past, Present, and Future of the Internet, "http://etrg.findsvp.com/timeline/history.html") Today one can shop online for books, food and wine, travel, and real estate. Other business activities include buying stocks and bonds, banking, and retirement planning. Online shopping accounted for over $9 billion in 1997 and is expected to be $30 billion by the year 2000. In light of this growth, the U.S. Commerce Department will begin studying the impact of online shopping on total retail activity. (Commerce Department to Measure Online Sales, "http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article/0,1087,archive_4_65111,00.html") Consumer spending via the Internet draws much interest, but business to business activity is also booming. The consulting group Piper Jaffray estimates that by the year 2001 Internet based business to business transactions will total US $201.6 billion. Forrester Research estimates that by 2002 online business to business transactions will total US $327 billion, (Internet Statistics, "http://www.commerce.net/research/stats/stats.html"), while other projections indicate that by 2003, consumers will spend $108 billion, while businesses will spend $1.3 trillion. (Spotlight: Corporate E-commerce Kicks Into Gear, "http://www.thestandard.com/metrics/display/0,1283,865,00.html")
For further information on the history of the Internet, an extensive list of links may be found at the Internet Society web site ("http://www.isoc.org/internet/history/").
Ownership of the internet is a complicated issue. In theory, the internet is owned by everyone that uses it. Yet, in reality, certain entities exert more influence over the "mechanics" and regulation of the internet than others. To understand the notion of ownership, one must understand the backbone of the internet--Domain Name Systems. As the internet continues to become a larger component of education, teachers need to be aware of the political, commercial, and public influences affecting the internet. The internet opens the door to new horizons of curriculum development, communications, research, and resources to support education. As educators, the Domain Name System has the potential to provide direction and simplification of internet resources. The following issues will be examined in this discussion of ownership:
The Domain Name System(DNS) is the address system of the internet. It facilitates the users' ability to navigate with the aid of the domain name and a corresponding Internet Protocol (IP) number. Each domain name is linked to a unique IP address.
The DNS is divided into categories called top level domains. The top level domains are subdivided into generic top level domains(gTLD) and country-code top level domains(ccTLD).(http://wipo2.wipo.int/process/eng/processhome.html,WIPO Internet Domain Name Process) Within the gTLD there are presently seven domains. They are .com, .net, .org, .int, .gov, .edu, and .mil. The first three (.com, .net, .org) are considered open domains since there are no restrictions on who may register names within theses domains. The other four (.int, .gov, .edu, and .mil) are restricted and only qualifying individuals or groups may register names within the domains. The domain .int is restricted to use by international organizations; .edu, is restricted to use by four-year colleges and universities; .gov is restricted to use by agencies of the federal government of the United States of America; and .mil is restricted to use by the military of the United States of America.
Country code top level domains are two letter designations assigned to individual countries. For example, Canada is given the domain .ca and Italy is given the domain .it. From a functional standpoint, ccTLDs and gTLDs are the same. They both provide the same connectivity. The ccTLDs are governed by the entity that owns the domain and can be restricted or open depending on the individual entity's rules.
In the early stages of the development of the WWW, the National Science Foundation (NSF) was given the task of managing the major internet backbone-the NSFNET. NSF's original purpose was to promote research and education at the University level.(http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/6.04/kashpureff_pr.html, Whose Internet Is It, Anyway) The NSF was quickly overwhelmed with this task and passed this job onto the private and commercial sector. In 1993, NSF granted exclusive rights to Network Solutions Incorporated (NSI) for the registration and management of the top level domains .com, .org, .net, and .edu.(http://www.icann.org/icann-pr21apr99.htm, ICANN)
Essentially, NSI was granted a monopoly of the public open domains. This monopoly gave NSI and the United States government significant control of the internet. This agreement between NSI and the United States remained until April of 1999 at which time the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers announced that five additional companies would be selected to participate in an initial two month test period of a new shared registration service.(http://www.icann.org/icann-pr21apr99.htm, ICANN) Additional plans are in the works to allow 29 companies to compete for Domain Name registration rights. This plan is the first step in achieving President Clinton's goals of the privatization of the management of Domains while providing competition for domain name services.(http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/press/dnsrls42199.htm, US Department Of Commerce News)
One of the major criticisms of the Domain Name System has been that the United States government and NSI have had too much control. Other nations have had to rely on country code domains or purchase generic top level domains through NSI. This attempt to open up the registry to competing organizations helps to decentralize some of the control that NSI and the United States have held for several years. Even though the U.S. has maintained this level of control, it by no means can be said that it owns the internet. The internet does not have a central point of authority or control and therefore cannot be said to be owned by any individual group. This autonomy offers great freedoms yet can also be a source of concern.
A major concern of many individuals is the limited number of open top level domains. Currently there are only three (.com, .org, .net). (http://wipo2.wipo.int/process/eng/processhome.html, WIPO Internet Domain Name Process) The criticism is that anyone should be allowed to create a top level domain. The success of these domains would be determined by the what the internet market dictates.(http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome//domainname/dnsdrft.htm, Green Paper) The addition of these top level domains could lead to a more descriptive system of classification. For example, the domain .arts would be a clear indication that the site located at this domain would include information pertaining to the arts. As the system stands today, it is difficult to tell what an individual might find at a given domain based on the domain name alone.
The counter argument is that allowing anyone to create a domain would lead to chaos that would lead to problems at the root server level. Furthermore, it would be more difficult for companies to protect their trademarks if there were a large number of top level domains. A trademark dilemma has already begun with only three domains. For example, the domain peta.org was originally registered to a parody organization known as People Eating Tasty Animals. In the real world peta is an acronym for the organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals. As a result of this controversy the Domain Name Rights Coalition was founded to provide protection to organizations wishing to protect trademarks.(Whose Internet Is It Anyway?) A great debate continues on whether a company that holds a trademark in the real world has exclusive rights to this trademark in cyberspace. The US Department of Commerce states "For cyberspace to function as effective commercial market, businesses must have confidence that their trademarks can be protected. On the other hand, management of the Internet must respond to the needs of the Internet community as a whole, and not trademark owners exclusively. The balance we strike is to provide trademark owners with the same rights they have in the physical world, to ensure transparency, to guarantee a dispute resolution mechanism with resort to a court system, and to add a new top-level domains carefully during the transition to private sector coordination of the domain name system."(http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome//domainname/dnsdrft.htm, Green Paper) Even with these reservations seven new domains are proposed to be added in the near future. (http://www.netnames.com/template.cfm?page=general_faqs&advert=yes, NetNames.com)
Educators must be aware of domains and what may lie in each type of domain. As the Domain Name System stands today this is not always a clear issue. The .com, .net, and .org domains can be misleading in that any type of information can be found housed at these sites. Sites in these domains need to be examined carefully before they are used with students in a classroom setting. That is not to say that commercial sites are unworthy of educational use; they just need to be previewed carefully. Restricted domains such as .edu and .gov are less misleading in that certain restrictions apply to who may post information on these sites. However, even with these restrictions teachers must take time to carefully examine the site. In addition, teachers need to inform students about domains as well. For example, it is important for students to realize that .com is a commercial site and .edu is a higher education site if they are to evaluate the type and validity of information presented.
From an educator's standpoint, a more descriptive domain system would be a welcome addition to the internet community. New domains that accurately describe the nature of the site would greatly benefit teachers and students alike. For such a system to work, a rigorous organizational structure must be put into place to insure that sites are registered into their proper domains. Until such a system exists, however, teachers and students need to continue to search through numerous sites seeking information.
For many the advent of online shopping and advertising has provided almost unlimited worldwide access to information and products that were once only available to a targeted few. People can access information and materials from their homes or work with only a few clicks of a mouse. Definitely, commercialization of the Internet has had benefits for both business and the consumer. (Benefits of Commercialization, "ben.html") However, as the rewards of doing business online have grown incredibly fast so have the concerns about what is happening to the cyberspace environment and to the Internet user's rights. The Web user now has unwanted commercial email appear in the mailboxes, advertising banners scroll across the screen, advertising windows pop-up on the screen, and information about the user is mined, collected, and stored in databanks as he explores the Web. Students and adults who once were only subject to passive advertising on radio, television, and the printed media are now often in a constant environment of interactive advertising not only at home but at school and work and may be subjected to a steady flow of unwanted and often too good to be true offers through their email. For educators to explain and alert their students to problems involving commercialism and the Internet, educators must understand what the practices and issues are.
Questions to consider in examining the invasive nature of commercialism include the following:
Unsolicited commercial email (UCE) has been described by Ray Everett-Church in his U. S. Senate testimony as having the "...potential to harm our economy in ways that terrorists could only dream about." Certainly this issue has caused the formation of the largest (over 10,000 members) Internet advocacy group in the United States, the Coalition Against Unsolicited Commercial Email (CAUCE). Unsolicited commercial email comes in two flavors: velveeta and spam. Velveeta is the practice of posting one copy of an unrelated text (usually an advertisement or political diatribe) to a server and them crossposting it to many newsgroups. (Cultural Transition: The Commercialization of the Internet by Christopher R. Vincent, "http://swissnet.ai.mit.edu/6095/student-papers/fall95-papers/vincent-culture.html") Spam is the practice of flooding the Internet with the same message to individual email users or to many usenet groups who would not choose to receive it. The most commonly sent unsolicited commercial email identified by (CAUCE, "http://www.cauce.org/") and the Federal Trade Commission include the following:
For those that would like to join the business of UCE there are also:
For students in particular this offers a new world of online advertising directed to them. They may not receive junk mail addressed to them at home or pay particular attention to advertising in the back of magazines or newspapers, but they will have this type of opportunity offered to them via the Web. Educators need to be aware of both the current practices and the issues involved in discussing unsolicited commercial email with their students. The issues involved associated with spam are freedom of speech, censorship and the effect of UCE on the operation of the Internet. There is very little written discussion on the positive aspects of UCE. Obviously, the creators of UCE expect to make money with a very little investment. They reject the opposing arguments that their actions hurt the operation of the Internet. The two basic positions and their supporting arguments are listed below.
Creators of UCE have the freedom and right to do their business, any type of business unhindered on the Internet.
The many that oppose spam with CAUCE speaking for most, respond with the following arguments.
The facts about the effects of large amounts of unsolicited commercial email on the Internet are negative in a number of respects. First , UCE represents about 30% of all email sent. The sheer volume has caused system outages on AOL, and Netcom. For both the large and the smaller Internet Service Providers (ISP) the problems include:
Second, UCE presents the problem of externalities. Externalities is defined by economists as the situation in which benefits and profits come by imposing cost on others. In the case of spammers the costs to the recipients are much greater than the costs of the sender. As soon as the message leaves the spammer, the cost is borne by others. While it is true that the victims suffer small amounts of damages, less than would be incurred by going out and hiring a lawyer, the entire economy suffers when inefficient businesses distribute their costs across great numbers of victims. (CAUCE, "http://www.cauce.org/") Some system operators have banded together to form consortia such as Open Relay Blocking System and the MAPS Realtime Black hole List to block incoming email from ISP's that do not practice anti-spam measures. (ORBS, "http://www.orbs.org/whatisthis.cgi")(MAPS, "http://maps.vix.com/rbl/")
In terms of regulation there are three schools of thought. Several have proposed the establishment of Internet communities where banishment from the community or loss of the ISP access would enforce general guidelines. (Postage due Marketing, Revisited--Part II, "http://www.internautics.com/raisch/article960917.htm") Harvard law school Professor Lawrence Lessig has argued for the creation of a policy-making institution to develop and enforce regulations. While he believes spam is a problem, he states that "the real problem is that vigilantes and network service providers are deciding fundamental policy questions about how the Net will work, each group from its own perspective." (Cyberspace Jurisprudence: Who Shall Punish Evil?, "http://www.internetwk.com/columns/frezz020199.htm") ("http://www.internautics.com/raisch/article960917.htm") A third viewpoint is that of David Johnson and David Post of the Cyberspace Law Institute of Temple University Law School who believe that coercive law enforcement cannot work on a global Internet and enforcement must emerge from the bottom up.
In terms of United States policy the regulation of UCE is still in the formative stages. CAUCE favors a single federal law that would address the issue of redistributing cost from the recipient to the sender. They also favor amending existing laws on junk faxes to include UCE. The Direct Marketing Association favors a federal bill proposed by Murkowski-Torricelli that would require all commercial email to be labeled as advertising and that senders provide for recipients an easy way to get their names removed from mailing lists. The states of Washington, California, and Nevada have passed laws that make it illegal to violate an ISP's terms of service and have established the precedent that junk email is trespassing. A Texas proposal by Carlos Truan is one of the toughest. It would outlaw any unsolicited advertisement that makes the recipient incur any expense or damage. A bill in Virginia would outlaw the use of fake return addresses on spam and require tagging as advertising. ("More States Consider Laws Restricting Junk", "http://www.nytimes.com/library/tech/99/02/cyber/articles/11spam.html" )
For the educator this means that students and schools will not have legislation at the present to protect them from the nuisance of unsolicited commercial email and that the best defense will be to educate students on the pitfalls and scams offered to them via the Web. In terms of opportunities for discussion, the methods of regulating a non territorial cyberspace world offer many opportunities for students to explore and to discuss how regulation could work.
If unsolicited commercial email presents the problem of getting what one doesn't want, then cookies represents the opposite problem of giving up information that one would rather keep private. A few years ago the IGA grocery store was one of the first in this area to offer the Hometown Value Card (HVC). Shoppers registered their name and address and received a card that offered special savings to the shopper if the shopper presented it before checking out. Some people resented the card and refused to get one saying it was an invasion of their privacy for the store to have a record of their purchases. Others said they didn't really care if the store had a record of what they bought as long as they received the store discount on certain purchases. Cookies on the Internet are light years ahead of the HVC card. Cookies allow an advertiser to silently and surreptitiously gather information on the consumer to custom tailor their advertising to the consumer and in the process collect highly specific pieces of information about the consumer. This information may be collected on databases to form a detailed profile of the computer user. The United States has no specific law of privacy to protect the consumer. The Federal Trade Commission last year found that 85 percent of Web sites collect some personal information, but only 14 percent posted privacy policies.
Questions to consider about cookies:
A cookie is a specific piece of information that a Website server gives to the client's browser when the browser and the server first meet. Every time the consumer visits that Web site the server and the browser share a file, a cookie, that gives information and is used to store more information on the current visit. For example, the search engine Lycos uses cookies to tailor the advertising banners that the user will see. If the user has frequently searched the Net for a particular type of music, the advertising banners run for that user will be about that type of music. InfoSeek uses cookies to capture behavior information to narrow Internet searches based on previous patterns of searches dictated by the cookie.
For the advertiser the use of cookies has a number of benefits. The greatest benefit is one-to-one marketing based on the user's interest and previous purchase patterns. The actual content of the page is defined by the viewer's interests. Cookies also allow better monitoring of advertising effectiveness and enable marketers to refine their Web sites to make them easier to use. If a user normally only clicks three times before leaving a site, the advertiser can move a desired section to an earlier position in the click-stream. Cookies are also able to monitor the time spent at a Web site and to monitor which pages the user actually clicked on. (Commercialism of the World Wide Web: The Role of Cookies, "http://www2000.ogsm.vanderbilt.edu/cb3/mgt565a/group5/paper.group5.paper2.htm")
Advertisers claim that cookies benefit users by reducing "banner burnout" and by tailoring advertising to what the user is interested in based on past patterns of interest. The opposing viewpoint is expressed by Evan Hendricks in a Privacy Times article, "Cookies represent a coming effort by organizations to monitor people's interest in their products through the covert gathering of personal data without their knowledge and consent." As more consumers prefer to keep such information private, newer versions of Netscape and Microsoft Explorer have options to turn off cookies. Software such as Cookie Monster 1.5 , Internet Fast forward and NSClean32 have been developed to filter cookies or automatically cleanup cookie files so that users can not be tracked. Some sites add a "middle man" such as (Anonymizer, "http://anonymizer.cs.cmu.edu:8080/") or NetAngels between the user and the Web site to filter cookies to protect privacy. WebTV and users of AOL cannot receive cookies. If these continue to grow in popularity, there will also be limits to where cookies may be collected. Other public interest organizations such as eTrust ("http://www.etrust.org/index.html") identify web sites that ensure a user's privacy and rate how well the privacy is protected. (Commercialism of the World Wide Web: The Role of Cookies,"http://www2000.ogsm.vanderbilt.edu/cb3/mgt565a/group5/paper.group5.paper2.htm")
Perhaps the most serious concerns about privacy in the commercial Internet involve the use of technology used by the advertiser DoubleClick. DoubleClick is an Internet advertising broker that targets its ads very narrowly. DoubleClick is known for its successful use of technology for 3M. By filtering out 3M ads that have been seen by the user three times without a click, DoubleClick has increased 3M's click rates on banners to about 7% compared to the the Web's average of about 3%. In March of 1999 DoubleClick had over 60 advertising sites. Whenever a user visits any of those sites, the DoubleClick server creates a cookie that is stored on the computer. DoubleClick builds a complete dossier on the user based on the compiled information from those 60 different sites. This profiling is more extensive than what any other advertiser has done and profiles have been done for over ten million Web users. Although DoubleClick does not currently have a market to sell any cross-matched user profiles, the potential market is there. ( DoubleClick is Watching You, "http://www.forbes.com/forbes/110496/5811342a.htm")
For now the use of cookies has one serious problem that does not make it as threatening to privacy as it could be. Cookies record information on the computer usage not the user. In the case of schools and other places where multiple people use the same computers the information collected is based on all the people that use the computer rather than an individual's use. However, if a user registers their name and address, all activity could be linked to a specific user.
Federal Trade Commission Chairman Robert Pitofsky warned direct marketers that they should have meaningful pledges guarding against the misuses of information gathered from their clients in place by the summer of 1999 or the misuses will lead to federal regulation. This warning was issued in part after GeoCities sold information gathered during its registration process to outside marketers. GeoCities had an explicit online statement that it would not sell such information but did sell demographic information such as income, education, marital status, occupation and personal interests to other firms. The FTC charged GeoCities with "misrepresenting the purpose for which it was collecting personal identifying information from children and adults." (Knowing You All Too Well, "http://newsweek.com/nw-srv/printed/us/st/ty0113_1.htm")
Peter McGrath has stated that "It's not government that threatens privacy today; it's Internet commerce. The Web has evolved into a marketplace, and in the process transformed privacy from a right to a commodity." Databases contain vast amounts of personal information, particularly from Web users, and are available from companies such as myprospects.com for the price of only sixteen cents a name. "Clickstream" monitoring, a page by page tracking of people as they travel through a Website combined with "collaborative filtering" which infers likes and dislikes based on comparing user profiles with others in the database has allowed marketers to refine monitoring, the gathering of information, and advertising to a science. The question is how will that information be used. (Knowing You All Too Well, "http://newsweek.com/nw-srv/printed/us/st/ty0113_1.htm")
The advertiser's position appears to be that I really do not need to tell you that I am gathering information, because I am doing this for your own good: the more I know about you, the better I'll be able to help you. The opposing viewpoint is that I have the right to know if information is being gathered; I have the choice to reveal or not reveal information about myself; and if I choose to reveal that information, I have the right to restrict where that information will go and how it will be used. If information has become a commodity, then perhaps like the grocery HVC card, the client should be able to deny information by not using the card or to receive compensation for revealing personal information. As Peter McGrath has stated, "After all, your information is your property; why should someone else use it to create value without sharing the proceeds?"
The educator's role is primarily that of making students aware of the invasive nature of commercialism and their rights to privacy. The educator must inform students about their potential loss of privacy through the use of cookies and the networking of databases. Students must be taught techniques to protect themselves from cookies if they choose not to reveal information about their shopping habits and preferences. Students should be able to recognize sites that have pledged to protect the consumer's privacy. Students must also be alerted to the possible, though subtle effect, of having their advertising custom tailored or perhaps limited, by what marketers feel will sell best to a particular demographic group or the cookies collected by a user's casual wanderings through the Web.
The advertising world increasingly views children's advertising as a uniquely profitable multi-billion dollar market. In 1995, children under 12 spent $14 billion, teenagers another $67 billion, and together they influenced $160 billion of their parents' annual spending. (Children in the Digital Age, http://www.reseau-medias.ca/eng/issues/priv/resource/digkids.htm). Children thus provide a three-in-one market as buyers themselves, influencers of their parents purchases, and future adult consumers. Children are confronted with program-length commercials on Saturday morning TV, their own TV and radio networks, magazines, clothing lines, direct mail advertising, as well as corporate sponsored school programs. Parents and educators must now confront the new multimedia, interactive digital universe of the internet which has the power to capture children's attention as never before. Still in its formative stages this world has been recognized as an exemplary resource for a diversity of ideas and information but also as a source of many areas of concern. Public interest advocates for children have focused primarily on protecting children from indecent content on the Internet. Little attention has been paid to the issues of access and the powerful commercial forces shaping the patterns of commercialism of youth in schools and specifically on the WWW. New methods of interactive advertising and marketing practices are being developed to specifically target children in this new medium and with the presence of advertising targeting younger and younger children, schools now face additional pressure to serve their students up as captive audiences to a variety of advertising strategies. It is time to consider the appropriateness of the connection between businesses and schools and develop workable policies as needed especially concerning online advertising .
Questions to consider include:
Amy Aidman ("http://ericps.edu.uiuc.edu/eece/pubs/digests/1995/aidman95.html") summerizes "Selling America's Kids" a report by the Consumers Union Education Services (CUES) which divides the examples of in-school commercialism into four groups:
1) In-School Ads: This category includes advertising on billboards, scoreboards, art works, book covers and product coupons and incentive awards distibuted in the schools.
One of the most successful of these ideas is Cover Concepts Marketing Services in Braintree, Massachusetts who began giving away free textbook covers, with ads from major corporations such as Nike and McDonalds, to schools. One research study found that brand name recall was up to 74% for Cover Concepts advertisers at the end of the school year and that Cover Concepts collects demographic data directly from the schools, a highly coveted database. (Hittin' the Books, "http://metalab.unc.edu/stayfree/13/coverconcepts.html")
2) Ads in Classroom Materials and Programs: This category includes commercial messages in magazines or video programming in the schools.
The most publicized example of this category is Channel One. This twelve minute daily news show targeted for students in grades 6 through 12 provides for two minutes of "age-appropriate" advertising for products desirable to this age group. Schools who agree to air the program each day receive a satellite dish, cable hookup and television for each classroom.
3) Corporate-Sponsored Educational Materials and Programs: This category includes the more subtle materials supplied by corporations such as posters, activity sheets and multimedia kits.
These programs are directed towards teachers as well as students. An example is Intel's "The Story Inside" multimedia kit with video tapes and sample materials to help teach the complicated story of how computers work. Offered free to teachers, this sophisticated multimedia kit also contains information promoting the company's products. The world of science education is replete with offers to receive needed equipment in exchange for attendance at a corporate training session.
4) Corporate Sponsored Contests and Incentive Programs: Brand names are brought into the school with rewards such as free food, admissions, trips or points toward buying educational supplies and equipment.
Examples of this type of advertising abound. Coupons for free pizza or skating, points for using a phone service to be exchanged for educational materials, the list is endless.
Organizations that support guidelines to address the flow of commercial messages into schools include the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, the National Parent Teacher Association, and the National Education Association. Both the Society of Consumer Affairs Professionals in Business (SOCAP) and Consumers International suggest that "education materials should be accurate, objective, clearly written, nondiscriminatory, and noncommercial." The Consumers Union supports the notion of schools as "ad-free zones" and suggests a three-pronged approach that includes:
This invasion is possible because the participatory medium of the Web provides new, powerful tools to capture the attention of children. One third of the estimated 15 million current Web sites are corporate cyber-homes (And Now A Web From Our Sponsor, "http://tap.epn.org/cme/infoactive/22/22nweb.html") and those targeting the growing numbers of children online are designed to capture the spending power of children by allowing them to explore, interact, and manipulate information using new, exciting technologies. Real time audio, real time video, Shockwave, Java, VRML--the development of online technological breakthroughs not only enhances the great variety of challenging educational experiences for children online, but opens a whole new set of possibilities to advertisers and marketers to capture the attention of younger and younger consumers. In order to make the best of these new media, as well as avoid the worst, we have a responsibility to develop an understanding of the issues involved and lead in the formation of the policies necessary to protect and best serve our children.
With the FCC's deregulation in the mid-1980's of children's television, toy manufacturers
began the wholesale creation of kids programing which served as half-hour commercials for
licensed products such as the Care Bears and Power Rangers and these advertisers are moving
aggressively into cyberspace. Claiming that "advertising is the only way to make information
services affordable to all," groups such as the Coalitiion for Advertising Supported Information
and Entertainment (CASIE) are lobbying for advertising as the dominant form of funding online
content and working hard to avoid government regulation.
(Children in the Digital Age,"http://www.reseau-medias.ca/eng/issues/priv/resource/digkids.htm)
With no limits on the number and length of ads and no regulation of direct pitches to kids,
commercial online services have developed special areas for kids (i.e., America Online "Kids
Only") and corporate web sites seamlessly integrate content and advertising, encouraging
children to develop ongoing relationships with characters and products as well as divulge
personal information in exchange for access to games and contests.
A less than exhaustive list of corporate kids sites includes:
"Instead of doing a commercial that's roughly targeted to boy's five to seven, which
is a lot of the advertising on Saturday morning TV, now you're targeting a particular
boy, who has a particular interest in a particular program, who lives in a house, whose
parents have a certain income. And at that level of targeting, I think the opportunity
for manipulation becomes much greater, really almost overwhelming for parents who are
trying to control the upbringing of their kids. Because we've never really existed before
in an information environment where the TV could reach out to your child and say, 'Bob,
wouldn't you like to have this new action figure, just like in the movie your saw last
week?' Little Bob, needless to say, will be flattered and intrigued by this new "TV that
talks back" a device that magically remembers his last visit and tailors the next one
to correspond to his special interests. It's exciting, this new personalized, interactive
media, but it's more than a little unfortunate. Bob and millions of children like him will
be transformed. They won't simply be children any more, but something much more valuable
to the corporations investing vast sums to develop the World Wide Web: they'll be customers."
(And Now a Web from Our Sponsor, "http://epn.org/cme/infoactive/22/22nweb.html")
As educators, we must recognize the power of online communications and
examine our responsibilities toward developing a vision of the
future. We should be leaders in the discussion of the development of carefully
considered policies and guidelines that will determine the direction of internet advertising
directed towards kids. Unless we involve ourselves in these discussions it is unlikely that
safeguards and regulations will be implemented.
Some organizations have already begun to address this critical issue. The Children's Advertising Review
Unit of the Council of Better Business Bureau released
voluntary guidelines ("http://www.bbb.org/advertising/caruguid.html#self") of responsible
online marketing to children on April 21, 1997. These guidelines advise that Web sites clearly designate
the difference between advertising and editorial content. The guidelines also address
issues of privacy and commerce and ask advertisers to make reasonable efforts to persuade chidren to get
parental permission before supplying any personal information about themselves or their families.
The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act ("http://tap.epn.org/cme/basic_rights.html")
passed by Congress on October 21, 1998 authorizes the
Federal Trade Commission to develop rules for regulating data collection on commercial Web sites
targeting children 12 and under. It does not, however, regulate the advertising itself or offer any protection
for young teenagers.
David V.B. Britt, chief executive of Children's Television Workshop expresses these concerns:
As adults who regularly guide and supervise children on the WWW we are aware that it is constantly
evolving, a work in progress. So how do we "do it right?" The guidelines and regulations that shape this progress have not yet
been written, and if nothing else, we should be discussing what direction we want that evolution to
take. We cannot afford to take a sit and wait attitude when the potential social, educational, and cultural
benefits of the World Wide Web are at stake.
To reiterate the arguments of those who want standards and/or regulation of online advertising targeting
children, we must look at practices and techniques that manipulate children and invade their privacy. The
Center for Media Education lists three practices that invade privacy:
Some technology approaches to protect children from commercialsim have been developed although all have
major limitations. Blocking software can generate lists of visited sites and allow blocking of
commercial sites children visit or use key-word blocking. At least one filtering software product
prevents children from disclosing addresses or phone numbers while online while one program blocks
access to ad banners. The Platform for Internet Content Selection (PICS) is a possible solution only
if advocate groups could provide the labor-intensive labeling system.
Without effective technological
solutions, some standards seem warrented to "do it right." So, who should set these standards? Who should
be in charge? Is government regulation, parent regulation, or self-regulation the answer, or should there
be no regulation at all? All four positions have pros and cons.
Kathryn C. Montgomery, in her article
Children in the Digital Age ("http://www.reseau-media.ca/eng/issues/priv/resource/digkids.htm")
outlines three key goals to guild public and private efforts for reform:
This last goal is one that seems most important as the current trend for financing services for
children is advertising. However, non-commercial
programs and services will require a great deal of money and will require new models of financing to be explored.
In July of 1997, President William J. Clinton and Vice President Albert Gore, Jr.
released a policy paper outlining the administration's position on electronic
commerce. Entitled ( A Framework for Global Electronic Commerce, "http://www.iitf.nist.gov/eleccomm/ecomm.htm")
it addresses financial issues, legal issues,
and market access issues. The proposals for facilitating the growth of
electronic commerce on the Internet are based on five principles:
However, no convenient maps denoting areas of responsibility and regulation
exist for the Internet. The world of cyberspace is a new frontier
without territorial borders. The increasing fast pace at which
technology becomes available has caused new problems and new areas
of conflict to arise. There is no international court to make or
enforce laws in cyberspace. Cyberspace is somewhat like the commons
areas defined by Garrett Hardin in his classic work
(The Tragedy of the Commons, "http://www.free-eco.org/free/FP/TragedyCommons.html"). The commons is an area owned by no
specific person but enjoyed by all. The herdsmen of the commons seeks
to maximize his gain by increasing his flock. He receives the
proceeds of the sale of his animal and the deleterious aspect of
overgrazing the commons is shared by the all the herdsmen that use
the commons. Commercial interests on the Internet also seek to
maximize their gain by increasing their share of the profits by more
and more advertising without regard to what happens to the overall
atmosphere of the Internet or to the world that the Internet user
views as he or she surfs along. One more web site directed at
capturing children interests by merging advertising with content, one
more pop-up banner, one more piece of spam or scam, one more bit of
information collected is acceptable for the producer, because the
producer benefits. Hardin concluded that "Ruin is the destination
toward which all men rush, each pursuing his own best interest in a
society that believes in the freedom of the commons."
As educators we must develop ways of meeting these challenges in
commercialization in our own "frontier" communities called schools.
As educators our first line of defense is to decide what is
acceptable in our community and more difficult to what degree is
commercialization acceptable. This involves developing the
following:
In summary, the paper reiterates that a coordinated strategy is essential for
government and private sector involvement. It will be necessary for all interested parties
to coordinate their efforts so that regulations and efforts are not duplicated or contradictory.
The private sector will need to provide leadership and deal as much as possible with the self-regulation of commerce on
the Internet. We feel that commerce on the Internet can
be of benefit to everyone if the private and public sectors work together
appropriately.
"We have to recognize that children are going to learn from online, whether it's something
we think is educational or not. Like television, it's not a question of whether
children are going to learn; it's only a question of what they are going to learn. When
we do it wrong, with violence or with mayhem or with completely mindless entertainment,
they are going to learn from that. And some of them will be harmed. When we do it right, children will learn
some things that will help them grow and become better citizens. It's a real and powerful responsibility."
And Now a Web From Our Sponsor, ("http://epn.org/cme/infoactive/22/22nweb.html")
A second list of practices that exploit young children includes:
(Web of Deception, "http://tap.epn.org/cme/cmedecov.html")
All children, regardless of economic status, should have access to the technologies
for education and full participation in society;
International efforts are needed to develop standards for new interactive media
since self-regulation is not likely to have an impact unless overseen and enforced by government; and
Public sectors online should be available to allow
children to learn and explore without advertising, manipulation, or exploitation.
Electronic Commerce
Just what is electronic commerce? Writing in the (Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, "http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc"),
Charles Steinfield of Michigan
State University states that electronic commerce can mean different
things to different groups. The (Electronic
Commerce Resource Center, "http://www.ecrc.ctc.com/about.htm") uses a definition that focuses primarily on electronic
interactions between businesses and minimizes the role of consumers in this
process. On the other hand the (National
Telecommunications and Information Administration, "http://www.ntia.doc.gov") (NTIA) uses a more
inclusive definition that encompasses any commercial activity that uses any
form of electronic technology. (General Introduction, "http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol1/issue3/genintro.html")
for this section, we will use the NTIA definition of electronic
commerce that includes any of the following activities:
Benefits to Business
In the early 1990's an Internet business meant a company that provided the hardware
or software necessary for individuals to use the Internet. America On Line (AOL)
could connect customers to their friends or offices and Netscape could help browsers
find their way around. Sensing a new marketplace, retailers quickly entered the
arena. Encryption technology soon made transactions safer, and the marketplace expanded.
(BBN Timeline, "http://www.bbn.com/roles/researcher/timeline/time90.htm")
Today a whole category of marketing businesses and magazines has grown
to help companies provide goods and services on the Internet. One such example
is ActivMedia's report on the "Top 100 Retail E-Commerce Websites" which was
featured in the February 19, 1999 InternetNews. For $1,295 businesses can
purchase an analysis of leaders' strategies, marketing techniques, and
site performance evaluations to use as a guide for their own business
development. Suppliers, distributors, and retailers of hard
goods can benefit from the usefulness of the Internet as well. Some businesses
choose to expand a traditional business to include a presence on the
Internet. Others such as top performers Amazon.com, Outpost.com, and AutoWeb
are companies which operate exclusively on the Web.
(Report: Top E-commerce Sites Doing $100 Million-Plus Annually,
"http://www.internetnews.com/ec-news/article/0,1087,archive_4_70281,00.html")
Small companies are able to access a global market, too. Because of
lower start-up investment costs on the Internet, these small companies can
compete with larger companies to attract customers.
(A Framework for Global Electronic Commerce, "http://www.iitf.nist.gov/eleccomm/ecomm.htm") The Internet can be used to create or expand a client base. The Internet
provides access to consumers around the world. Internet users can also be helpful
in providing information about product analysis, advice, or help with problems.
Before investing in costly goods or services, businesses can request information
from others who have purchased the same goods and services. If time is indeed
money, the Internet provides fast access to the office for travelers or
business people, rapid access to information necessary for decision making, or
instant dissemination of product information. In addition, businesses can
obtain expert advice and help, recruit new employees, communicate with peers, or
watch how competitors are solving problems similar to their own.
(Internet for Businesses, "http://rtd.com/people/rawn/business.html#Internet for Businesses") Many businesses keep a web site whose audience is its own employees.
By using the Intranet employees can explore the latest developments on
benefits, products, and what the CEO is thinking.
(Internal Webs Give Companies a New Solution to an Old Problem, "http://www.internetworld.com/print/monthly/1996/03/intranet.html")
Benefits to Consumers
Perhaps the biggest benefit to consumers is that the Internet allows consumers
access to a global marketplace. Carey Heckman of the Stanford Law and
Technology Policy Center writes that the consumer gains more powerful and efficient
purchasing in the electronic marketplace
(Gateways to the Global Market: Consumers and Electronic Commerce,
"http://www-techlaw.stanford.edu/pages/OECDBack.html")
In addition, the shopping is convenient. Without going out into the rain or
snow, the consumer can compare prices or shop for related products
from various suppliers. The consumer can order and pay for the purchases
without leaving home or work. (A Framework for Global Electronic Commerce, "http://www.iitf.nist.gov/eleccomm/ecomm.htm") With Internet access to well-designed
web sites, the consumer can control the amount of information she gleans.
The consumer may hear audio, see video, or view the product in a virtual
environment. Because the supplier does not have the expense of printing
and maintaining hard copies of product information, more information is
likely to be available. Suggestions for product use can be added to the
minimal technical data. The information is more likely to remain current when
a company does not have to scrap brochures and catalogs. Thus the consumer can
get the latest updates as soon as they become available. The information is the
same for all consumers regardless of their race, gender, or ethnicity. Many
consumers shop on the Internet because global price competition can result in
lower prices. Lower transaction costs for the supplier can also save the consumer
money. The cost of handling Internet orders is a fraction of the cost of telephone
sales or sales in a retail store, and most orders can be made any time of the day
or night, all week long. (Gateways to the Global Market: Consumers and Electronic
Commerce, "http://www-techlaw.stanford.edu/pages/OECDBack.html") As Internet
shopping has become more common, protections are emerging for the consumer.
Organizations such as (Consumer World, "http://www.consumerworld.org") have evolved
to help consumers navigate the waters of the Internet marketplace.
Consumers who have a complaint about the products or services they bought
online can send it to the Benefits to Education
Corporate Sponsored Education Resources
Another area of commercialism affecting education are the sites sponsored by
corporations with a wide variety of services for education. These offer many of
the same resources offered by Universities such as
(Web 66, "http://web66.coled.umn.edu/") from the University of Minnesota,
however, corporate logos are very evident.
Paid Subscription Services
Many corporations are also offering subscription services available for a yearly and/or project
specific fee.
Regulation