The internet has changed the way people find information, conduct business, and keep in touch. For many people, it is an indispensable part of their lives. However, an ongoing struggle is taking place over how the internet is provided and how open it is, a struggle pitting cable companies against “open internet” advocates. The following five facts offer some context on that struggle.
Special thanks to Learning Life content writer Craig Gusmann for helping to research and draft these facts.
1) Net Neutrality
Net neutrality, a term coined by Columbia University media law professor Tim Wu in 2003, essentially means that the government should treat all data on the internet equally. This means that data cannot be tampered with in any way, regardless of where it originates from. For example, a web page created by a person in Idaho should load at the same speeds as a web page created by a multi-billion dollar corporation in NYC. Advocates of net neutrality argue that it is a vital component of an open internet easily accessible to everyone.
2) Open Internet
While the internet has been around since the 1970s, and publicly accessible since the late 1980s, then Vice President Al Gore helped advance the idea of an open internet in a 1994 speech he gave to The Superhighway Summit at UCLA. Gore asked, “How can government ensure that the nascent Internet will permit everyone to be able to compete with everyone else for the opportunity to provide any service to all willing customers? Next, how can we ensure that this new marketplace reaches the entire nation? And then how can we ensure that it fulfills the enormous promise of education, economic growth and job creation?”
3) Unnecessary Government Regulation
This is one of the common arguments levelled against net neutrality. According to opponents, net neutrality sets a precedent of government interference, making it easier for the government to control the internet in the future. Opponents also argue that net neutrality harms innovation because for-profit companies that control internet access cannot create “slow lanes” and “fast lanes,” charging internet content providers and/or consumers more for faster service, and hence that companies have less monetary incentive to improve their internet services and infrastructure.
4) Blocking, Throttling and Fast Lanes
On February 26, 2015, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) voted to apply Title II of the 1934 Communications Act to internet providers, reclassifying broadband internet access as a telecommunications service and, therefore, similar to a public utility. There are three main rules in the FCC’s decision: 1) no blocking of access to “legal content, applications, services, or non-harmful devices”; 2) no “throttling” or degrading of any internet traffic; and 3) No “fast lane” prioritization of the content of favored partners or in exchange for payment.
5) The FCC
The Federal Communications Commission “regulates interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and U.S. territories.” The FCC is composed of five commissioners, each serving a five-year term. Each commission is appointed by the U.S. President then confirmed by the U.S. Senate.
According to the FCC, “Only three commissioners may be members of the same political party, and none can have a financial interest in any commission-related business.” This, however, does not stop any President from nominating and the Senate from confirming commissioners who will likely vote as they see fit, whether in favor of cable companies, or internet consumers. This is one of the many ways that U.S. Presidents and the U.S. Senate directly impact citizens lives, in this case their internet access. And the changing composition of the FCC as commissioner terms end and new commissioners are appointed by changing Presidents and Senate majorities make internet access an ongoing struggle.
Why do acronyms for international organizations matter? Acronyms are abbreviations of names, frequently the first letter of each word in a name. Acronyms are often used for the sake of efficiency or brevity in discussions on television, radio and other media, as well as in public meetings and casual conversations. Thus, it makes sense for individuals to know the meaning of common acronyms in order to better understand what is being discussed. This is perhaps especially true in international relations, which affect us often more than we realize, and in which acronyms are often used to summarize long names of organizations, treaties, policies, etc., The following Learning Life quiz introduces readers to five commonly referenced acronyms and the important international organizations they represent.
Note: Special thanks to Learning Life intern, Kane Boynton, for conducting the research for this quiz, and drafting the questions and answers.
Information, Knowledge & Inequality in Modern Societies
On some basic level, all human societies no matter how old, simple or small, depend on information and knowledge. But information and knowledge are far more developed and central to life in modern societies, even as they become more unequally distributed.
The line between “information” and “knowledge” is frequently blurred in ordinary conversation, but it is worth delineating the two terms. Information may be simply defined as data, and data includes facts, concepts and theory, with theory used to connect and lend coherence to what can otherwise be a disconnected jumble of facts and concepts. Knowledge, in turn, can be understood as the varying levels of personal or collective mastery of information. While information is stored on paper or computers, knowledge is stored in people’s minds. One may certainly argue with the way I differentiate knowledge and information here, but the distinction has the benefit of highlighting that (a) individuals and societies vary in their knowledge, and (b) data is in people’s heads and/or out there in the world.
Individuals and societies’ knowledge depends in no small part on how freely available information is. Early human hunter-gatherer groups had relatively small stocks of knowledge that were transmitted mostly orally from generation to generation. Knowledge in such societies was not very unequally distributed because there was not much of it, and that which existed – on how to hunt or gather and prepare food, create clothes, weapons and shelter, make sense of their environment – was often widely shared to help ensure material and cultural survival.
However, as humans settled, developed agriculture, print and industry, the stock of information and knowledge grew substantially, as did the division of labor. As Adam Smith, widely considered the founder of modern economics, long ago noted in his classic study, The Wealth of Nations (1776), division of labor is vital to increasing the efficiency and wealth that mark modern societies. As labor and tools became more sophisticated, it made sense to make people specialize their labor, so they could each get better by focusing, and together, they could produce so much more.
Yet Smith also recognized that the division of labor increases inequality. As people specialize their work, some get menial labor that limits their capacities, including their knowledge, while others get substantive work that expands their capacities. Of course, people can and sometimes do pursue knowledge off the job, but the very unequal status, work and resources different jobs afford make for enormous differences not just in income, but in knowledge accumulation over years. Worse, people tend to pass on their unequal capacities and resources to their children, as numerous social scientists have documented (e.g., Bourdieu 1984, Lareau 2003, Murray 2012, Putnam 2015).
Just as there are sharp (and growing) income and wealth inequalities in the contemporary world (see Piketty 2014), so too are there sharp inequalities in education and knowledge. Inequality has existed in all human societies, but its extent varies widely depending in part on the extent of division of labor and the distribution of power, that is, who does what work and who controls what resources.
What economists call “information asymmetry” – situations in which one or more individuals have more or better information than others – is especially common in modern societies, where specialized information is essential to everything we own and do, from smart phones and laptops to cars and homes to stocks and bonds, and from eating and exercising to commuting, working, even playing.
It’s not difficult to think of many common situations in modern societies in which people rely on those with more or better knowledge – teachers, coaches, doctors, tour guides, salespeople, repair-people, financial advisors – some if not all of whom have interests that do not align with those they are advising or guiding. Those who know more have an interest in withholding what they know, especially when that knowledge is power. Information asymmetry and knowledge inequality are inescapable problems in part because of such withholding, and because division of labor is necessary to the complex operation and productivity of modern societies.
Furthermore, the modern world has become flooded with information, and not all that information is equal in value. As I have argued elsewhere, it is well worth distinguishing between trivial information – like who’s dating who in Hollywood, who’s winning at what sport, what are the latest fashions – and significant information (the latter I call signia – how to cook safely, administer first aid, operate a smart phone, get a job, or how governments, economies and ecologies work. Just as there is junk food and healthy food, in the world of information, there is trivia and there is signia. As easy, exciting and profitable as trivial information can be, often the most boring or complicated information is the most important (e.g., think economics).
Pervasive trivia, information asymmetry, and knowledge inequality are all common features of modern societies. And yet, modern democratic societies have an interest in more knowledgeable citizens because knowledge helps people make better decisions, whether as workers, parents, voters, consumers, or else. Accordingly, it behooves governments, nonprofits and others interested in nurturing citizens’ capacities to think of creative ways to spread signia and reduce knowledge inequalities.
Printing signia on everyday surfaces (napkins, placemats, posters, cereal boxes, etc.), as Learning Life does, is not a panacea. Yet it is a still relatively undeveloped path to engaging more people in learning signia, whether that’s how to recognize the signs of stroke, where to find work, what local nonprofits are doing good work in the community, or else. We are excited to be developing that path, and are happy to connect with others developing similar paths to informing and engaging more citizens.
Bourdieu, Pierre. 1984. Distinction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Lareau, Annette. 2003. Unequal Childhoods. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Murray, Charles. 2012. Coming Apart. New York: Crown Forum.
Piketty, Thomas. 2014. Capital in the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
Putnam, Robert. 2015. Our Kids. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Smith, Adam. 1937 (1776). An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations. New York: Random House. (more…)
Five Facts on U.S. Presidents’ Executive Orders
Executive orders are directives from the U.S. President to the federal government to help carry out laws passed by Congress. They hold similar power to legislation passed by Congress, but do not have to be ratified by Congressional vote. This has caused controversy as opponents of executive orders often claim Presidents use them to expand their power into law-making, which Congress constitutionally controls. Learning Life offers the following five facts on the history and importance of executive orders to provide some perspective.
Thanks to Learning Life writer Craig Gusmann for helping to draft these five facts.
1) Not in the U.S. Constitution
The U.S. Constitution makes no mention of executive orders. However, Article II of the U.S. Constitution does require the President to “take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed.” Presidents have used this clause to argue that executive orders help the federal government “faithfully execute” the laws of Congress, though those may not be laws existing majorities of legislators in Congress support.
2) Franklin Delano Roosevelt
America’s longest-serving President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, issued 3,721 executive orders — more than any U.S. President, by far — in his 12 years in office, between 1933 and 1945, during the Great Depression then World War II. Woodrow Wilson issued the second most executive orders — 1,803 — in his eight years in office, from 1913 to 1921.
FDR’s executive orders, among other things, established internment camps during World War II, used mostly to intern Japanese Americans and Japanese immigrants, and the Works Progress Administration, which employed millions of Americans during the Great Depression to construct roads, bridges, buildings and other public works.
3) The Golden Age of Executive Orders
The turbulent years between the presidencies of Teddy Roosevelt (1901-1909) and Harry Truman (1945-1953) could be called the “golden age of executive orders” in U.S. history because that period saw the greatest increase in the use of executive orders:
Teddy Roosevelt (1901-1909): 1,081
William H. Taft (1909-1913): 724
Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921): 1,803
Warren Harding (1921-1923): 522
Calvin Coolidge (1923-1929): 1,203
Herbert Hoover (1929-1933): 968
Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933-1945): 3,721
Harry Truman (1945-1953): 907
That period included World War I, the Great Depression, World War II and the Korean War, among other major events. Before Teddy Roosevelt, the number of executive orders a U.S. President issued never rose above 217 (Ulysses Grant), and since Truman it has never risen above 484 (Dwight Eisenhower).
4) Obama in Perspective
Despite the substantial publicity some of President Obama’s executive orders (e.g., on immigration, relations with Cuba) have received, Obama has exercised this power relatively little, issuing 203 thus far, less than his predecessor, George W. Bush (291), as well as Bill Clinton (364), Ronald Reagan (381), and Jimmy Carter (320), among other post-World War II Presidents. However, if one includes the presidential “memoranda” Obama has issued, which have the same legal power as executive orders, then Obama’s exercise of executive authority has been greater than any U.S. president since Harry Truman.
5) Famous Executive Orders
Arguably the most famous executive order was Abraham Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation, which he issued on January 1, 1863, during the Civil War, to claim the freedom of all slaves in rebel Confederate states. Other famous executive orders include Harry Truman’s order to racially integrate the U.S. armed forces, and Dwight Eisenhower’s order racially desegregating public schools.
2) Open Internet
