(Original text from Code and Other Laws of the Internet, by Lawrence Lessig, edited and expanded by Sofia Lemons.)
Cyberspace is not one place. It is many places. And the character of these many places differ in ways that are fundamental. These differences come in part from differences in the people who populate these places, but demographics alone don’t explain the variance. Something more is going on.
At the start of the Internet, communication was through text. Media such as USENET newsgroups, Internet Relay Chat, and e-mail all confined exchange to text -- to words on a screen, typed by a person (or so one thought).
The reason for this limitation is fairly obvious: The bandwidth (the speed at which data can travel across a network) of early Net life was very low. In an environment where most users connected at 1,200 baud, if they were lucky, graphics and streaming video would have taken an unbearably long time to download, if they downloaded at all. What was needed was an efficient mode of communication—and text is one of the most efficient. Most think of this fact about the early Net as a limitation. Technically, it was. But this technical description does not fully encapsulate this architecture that made possible a certain kind of life and community in this online space.
Since the creation of the World-wide Web, the forms of communication open to the Internet community have expanded greatly to include images, audio, video, and more direct interaction through mouse and touchscreen. The increased bandwidth has allowed for faster refreshing of information and more detail in what can be sent. These have opened doors for people to interact in new ways online, some more closely matching the real world, such as video chatting, and others more unique to the digital world, such as hashtags and fantasy video games.
While the ideal of the Internet is a virtual space in which there are no limitations and for whose users the restrictions of the real world melt away, those aspects of the real world often impact and are impacted by the Internet. Some real world limitations restrict who has access to the Internet or to which parts they have access. Other real world limitations are exactly what draw certain people to the Internet or cause them to become so devoted to it. And, in some cases, the freedom of the Internet makes space for people to behave without consideration for the other people who inhabit that community. Some important questions to ask of the Internet as a whole or any part of it are "Who has access?", "Who does not?", and "How does the system encourage users to interact with each other?"
(Original text from The Internet Society under CC-BY-NC-SA license, edited and expanded by Sofia Lemons.)
The Internet offers an opportunity for inclusiveness – to view the global community of its users as one while recognizing its rich diversity. Internet technologies have the potential to give persons with disabilities the means to live on a more equitable basis within the global community in a manner that previously was not possible.
For persons with disabilities, accessibility means being able to use a product or service as effectively as a person without a disability. This means using inclusive design principles to make products and services usable by a wider section of the population. In some cases, this is not possible, and assistive technologies may be called upon to fill the gap. If so, mainstream technologies should enable the software or hardware connection of the assistive device seamlessly, in terms of both interoperability and data portability.
Persons with disabilities face as many different barriers as there are types and degrees of disability. For example, people with a visual impairment who use screen-reading software may be confronted by websites that have confusing navigation, or that lack descriptions of images; while people with a hearing impairment may be unable to participate in online conferencing because it lacks captioning.
Through removing barriers, persons with disabilities will be better able to use and contribute to the richness of the Internet by participating independently in the communities of their choice. While making websites accessible is vital, solutions for accessibility are needed to deliver any product or service over the Internet and to accept content or services created by persons with disabilities regardless of the equipment or medium of input. This includes websites, databases, browsers, multimedia applications, mobile phones, computers and their auxiliary equipment.
As the Internet has developed and expanded, so have the number of products created to help make its content to users with disabilities. Some examples include speech recognition software, screen readers and optical character recognition (OCR). Speech recognition software was originally designed for people with limited hand movements who could not enter text by typing, but is also often used for mobile device "handsfree" modes. Screen readers (or text to speech engines) turn digital text into spoken word, with the original aim of enabling users with low vision to access digital text. They are also often featured in "driving modes" and "handsfree modes" for mobile devices, as well as being useful in working with users who are not fully literate (either young children or language learners.) Optical character recognition (OCR) is a means of turning physical text (such as from books or signs) into digital text, and can be useful for helping users with limited vision to access text. However, the technology has also been used to digitize many older texts that previously never existed in digital formats and in the creation of automatic translation tools.
Accessibility on the World-Wide Web is an especially noteworthy topic because the Web, in many ways, was designed with accessibility in mind and can be a powerful tool for accessibility if used correctly. HTML (Hyper-Text Markup Language), the language behind web pages, is not a programming language but rather a descriptive language. This means that creators of web pages do not specify exact size, style, or appearance of content in their page, so much as they describe the importance and kind of content they are creating. Creators define that text is a heading, has emphasis, is a new paragraph, and so on but the HTML itself should not specify how the content is to look. Images can have their sizes specified relative to the rest of the page content, and can have alternate text specified, which can be displayed or read aloud for users or devices for which images are not useful. This allows users with different needs to view the content according to their own preferences. On a well-designed site users with limited mobility can use keyboard navigation instead of a mouse, users on mobile devices will see text in smaller but denser fonts, and users of a screen-reading program can hear text with pauses and emphasis in the places where the HTML describes such features. It is, therefore, important that content creators pay attention to these features when creating content and not take shortcuts to make things look a set way with one particular kind of user or device in mind.
However, each new development on the Internet can present new challenges for accessibility. Programmers and content creators should always be mindful of accessibility when adding new features to their sites and programs. One important example of a feature made more common on the web that can present problems for accessibility is the CAPTCHA, which are images with obscured text that a human can read but many computer programs cannot. These were immensely helpful tools for site administrators in ensuring that spam bots and other malicious software couldn't access parts of their site. However, when done without accessibility in mind, they can also block users with limited vision from entering the site. The accessible choice, which has become much more common recently, is to provide several options for ensuring a human is using the site, such as a choice of graphical or audio CAPTCHA. This is just one example of how new Internet technology can serve a very important purpose, but can be a very limiting factor to many users if accessibility is not taken into consideration.
(Original text from Association for Progressive Communications, edited and expanded by Sofia Lemons.)
Affordable and reliable Internet access has become a vital means to exercise fundamental human rights and to support economic, social and human development. As observed by the former UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, Frank La Rue, “the Internet is one of the most powerful instruments of the 21st century for increasing transparency in the conduct of the powerful, access to information, and for facilitating active citizen participation in building democratic societies.”
However, as the Internet becomes more ubiquitous, less is being heard from those who are unconnected – the less wealthy and more marginalized – who are unable to exercise their rights on the same footing as those who are connected. This includes access to basic services from governments and businesses which now use the Internet as a platform for day-to-day transactions. Those who do not have access are doubly excluded: excluded from the “new” world of information and communications that the Internet delivers, and also excluded from the “old” analogue world they used to have access to – even if imperfectly – because so many of those services and opportunities are increasingly only available online. The gap in terms of resources and experiences between those with access to high-speed (broadband) Internet and those without access (or with limited access) is referred to as the digital divide.
It is important to observe that to effectively measure and analyze access inequalities, one has to look further than Internet connection numbers. One cannot speak simply of those who are either connected or unconnected. There is actually a wide spectrum of connectivity levels ranging from complete disconnection up to those connected on high-bandwidth unlimited connections, with the majority of people somewhere in between – most of them being irregularly connected on high-cost, low speed mobile broadband links.
Clearly there have been major improvements in access for many, particularly through reduced costs of equipment (e.g. smartphones and tablets), and greater availability of wireless broadband services (e.g. Wi-Fi and 3/4G). But high Internet access costs continue to be among the biggest factors limiting connectivity in most developing regions. Inequalities in access are more visible when disaggregated by disadvantaged groups – particularly women (who are often concentrated in low-income groups). The access gap is also much more prevalent in cultural minorities, people living in remote areas, and in the least developed countries generally.
The digital divide is also particularly evident along the urban/rural axis. In most developing countries, and even some developed countries, Internet users in rural areas are often faced with limited coverage and much slower Internet speeds.
In addition, those restricted to mobile services experience broadband speeds that are comparatively low, while latencies and costs are usually much higher than fixed wireless (e.g. Wi-Fi) or cable-based services. Mobile links also usually have metered access and traffic caps which constrain the amount of data that can be exchanged affordably, and restrict the user’s ability to manage costs of access effectively. When costs cannot be predicted, this creates a strong chilling effect on use. There are also limitations on the kinds of activities that users can perform with only a mobile device, as compared to those with access to a full Internet-connected desktop or laptop computer.
Therefore ending digital exclusion is not simply a matter of improving the coverage of mobile broadband services, but also of improving the affordability and coverage of both fixed and mobile services, along with building the technical and human capacity to ensure reliability, the ability to deploy low-cost locally owned networks, and the ability to use the applications and content effectively. The key to affordable access is giving local people the skills and tools to solve their own connectivity challenges. The Internet is built and managed by people – we need fewer “satellite and balloon” projects, and more human development. In the current context, it is also necessary to take into account the extent to which broadband and broadcast media are converging technically, and at an ownership level, are becoming more vertically and horizontally concentrated. This has serious implications for the free flow of information, the diversity and plurality of content, and the conditions of access to service provision.
But there is also an overarching point frequently ignored by efforts to address the access gap. When looking at access data in a disaggregated manner, it becomes evident that those with the least connectivity are by and large also those who are most excluded economically, socially and politically. Their lack of access is first and foremost a result of this exclusion, and while the Internet may present opportunities for some social advancement, it will not alter the structural social and economic processes that causes inequality and exclusion in the first place.
As long as there has been Internet community, there has been bad behavior on the Internet. Often, bad behavior on the Internet is referred to broadly as "trolling", a term based on the mythological monsters that would live in dark places (such as in caves or under bridges) and attack innocent people. Internet trolling specifically refers to making deliberately offensive or provocative online postings with the aim of upsetting someone or disrupting normal proceedings online. Because of this, not all bad behavior online is strictly trolling. A person who gets angry in a debate they are truly passionate about and uses offensive language, for instance, is not trolling. Often in Internet slang, heated and hostile arguing like this is referred to as flaming or flame wars.
Trolling can take many forms, but is specifically aimed to cause strong reactions in others. Trolls will often exploit the fact that other Internet users care deeply about something and find ways to talk about it that are most likely to upset them. A troll might use the fact that others care about a certain game, and then speak harshly of that game or do things to disrupt gameplay for others without actually trying to play the game, themselves. Or a troll may use a person's sense of pride or privacy and post insulting or slandering content about them. Trolls do not usually care about the topic at hand, themselves, but are excited by the reactions of others. Trolling can involve harmless pranks, but can also include actions that might cost the target of the trolling in terms of lost jobs or social stigma, or might be threatening and harassing to the target.
While anyone can engage in acts of trolling in isolated incidents or simply on their own, some trolls operate in groups and even work together to increase the reach and impact of their actions. These people will gladly refer to themselves as trolls and frequent online spaces with others like themselves are engaged in trolling subculture or subcultural trolling. Subcultural trolls often share their trolling or identify targets to operate on in groups. When subcultural trolls invade another website or gaming server to disrupt the community there and incite reactions from the regular users, this is referred to as a raid.
One of the first spaces that was identified as being specifically for troll-like behavior was Usenet's alt.tasteless, which was created in 1990 to allow space for intentionally rude or disgusting material. Users of alt.tasteless posted their own deliberately offensive material and amused each other with anecdotes of their outlandish behaviors. Content on alt.tasteless ranged from pornographic to simply random (such as obsessions with the Autralian condiment vegemite.) However, one of the first documented troll raids was carried out by users of alt.tasteless on another Usenet group, rec.pets.cats. In this raid, users of alt.tasteless posted insincere and usually disturbing questions or stories about cats they claimed to have, and responded to sincere rec.pets.cats users' posts with offensive or unhelpful advice and responses. The rec.pets.cats users responded with disgust, dismay, and anger, which was hilarious to the alt.tasteless users and led to more of them joining in the raid. This is a perfect example of organized raiding, trolls using another's' passion about a topic against them, and the emotional reactions of the targets feeding the trolls' enjoyment and convincing others to engage in further trolling. Because of her speaking out about the problems the alt.tasteless users were causing, one prominent rec.pets.cats user's personal phone and address were posted publicly, which led to harassment and threats toward her. This is another common (but not always present) feature of troll reactions to targets who do not give up and try to speak out.
A later hot spot for subcultural trolling was the website 4chan, and specifically it's /b/ board, which was created for "random" content and allows users to post anonymously. The /b/ board has a "no rules" policy, and makes no real effort to control content other than to remove illegal content and ban people attempting to break the site. Because of this, much content that is racist, sexist, slanderous, or graphically sexual is posted to the board. Many of the most popular Internet memes (such as lolcats and rickrolling) originated on /b/, displaying the group's ability to spread ideas and content far and wide. This ability to spread a message is one of the common features of subcultural trolling, because trolls often use this ability to spread misinformation in their campaigns. They also have a history of exploiting the U.S. media and law enforcement's reactions to dramatic-sounding problems. There have been cases where /b/ users initiated media scares about made-up drug or sex trends. /b/ users have engaged in campaigns against wide ranges of groups, including feminists, random teenagers, and white supremacists. They often see their actions as being neutral in value and engage in them exclusively for the amusement at others' dismay This particular sense of amusement is often referred to as "lulz." Subcultural trolls in general often brush off the negative impact their actions have on their targets, blaming the harm instead on the target's emotional reactions to the incidents.
Another issue that has arisen in our more digitally connected community is harassment and bullying online, or cyber-bullying. While the act of harassing or mistreating others is by far not new or exclusive to the Internet, it can take on new forms and grow in scale easily online. Because many people cannot disconnect from the Internet without risking professional or social exclusion, harassment on the Internet can be very hard to escape in the way one can sometimes get away from real-world harassment. This omnipresent negativity directed at the victim can lead to lower self esteem, anxiety, depression, isolation, self harm, and even suicide. One such incident that gained wide-scale attention was the case of Megan Meier, who committed suicide because of cyber-bullying that it was later found involved the parents of a former friend of Meier.
Awareness around online harassment and cyber-bullying has increased with more prevalent examples of the harm done by such behaviors, and California passed one of the first laws against cyber-bullying in 2008. As of 2016, 48 states had bullying or harassment laws which included electronic harassment. Most require schools to institute policies against online harassment and/or cyber-bullying and 18 included possible criminal sanctions against such acts. No current federal law exists with regard to cyber-bullying. The Megan Meier Cyberbullying Prevention Act was proposed in 2009, but was never brought to a vote. Often issues of cyber-bullying and harassment are handled under existing laws about stalking and harassment. Threats made online fall under the same law as threats over the phone or mail, U.S. Code 18, Section 875c. Many incidents of cyber-bullying involve hacked accounts or other unauthorized access to online services, and thus fall under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 2008.
Victims of online harassment may face difficulties when reporting their harassers to authorities. Sometimes, local law enforcement does not recognize the seriousness of the issue or know how to handle it. However, the case may not yet be severe enough to report to the FBI. Many law enforcement agencies have established cyber crime units in response to these problems.
The Internet has provided ways for people to overcome difficulties and connect when they face isolation or intolerance, as well. Many individuals are able to express themselves online in ways that they would not be able to in person or to connect with a larger community of people like themselves even when those community members are far apart. Internet community and services can provide support and sources of hope to individuals who most need it, such as the many online support chat rooms, text lines, and resource pages.
Many people from minority communities of many kinds can use the Internet connect with people who share their experiences when no one they know in their local community does. For example, the It Gets Better project encouraged LGBT people to share their stories of surviving harassment, bullying, self-harm, and isolation to give LGBT youth who might be considering suicide. Likewise, the UN Refugee Agency launched the Global Strategy for Connectivity for Refugees because research showed that refugees with access to internet-connected devices can help refugees to maintain connection to distant family members and access resources they need. Furthermore, minority communities can form their own social spaces online where they can share ideas and experiences they may not feel as able to voice in the real-world community. Some of these communities are more formally identified, using an entire website or application as their space like After Ellen (a media site focused on lesbian and bisexual women). Others have less well-defined boundaries and center around hashtags and informal networks within other social media, such as Black Twitter.
The Internet can also offer a sense of connectedness to people who are unable to leave their homes for various reasons. Seniors and people with disabilities that make leaving their homes difficult or impossible can use the Internet to stay informed with the world, share their experiences, and access the services they need. For those with mental health conditions that lead them to isolate themselves (such as agorophobia, social anxiety, and PTSD) the Internet can help them form or maintain relationships even when in-person interaction is not something they can engage in. Remote work positions allow home-bound individuals to make some income and feel productive, as more and more employees add positions which can be done entirely from home. In general, the Internet expands the reach of these individuals from their own household to the entire world.