
Assessment and Evolution of
Community Networking
© 1994, Morino Institute. All rights reserved.
First presented at the 1994 "Ties That Bind" Conference
on
Building Community Networks
Sponsored by Apple Computer and the Morino Institute
Cupertino, CA
May 5, 1994
Contents
Preface Introduction Emergence and
Evolution of Community Networking Assessment and
Future of Community Networking Seize the
Opportunity! Appendix
A Appendix
B Notes
Preface
Seventeen months ago the Morino Foundation began a journey to learn how we
could best use our resources, knowledge and time to help others. Our goal was
then — and still is now — to help make a difference and, most importantly, to
drive positive, sustaining social change. In our journey we met over 500
individuals from over 300 organizations, learned of valuable programs and
services, had the opportunity to benefit from innovative visions and ideas, and
found truly imaginative and committed people making contributions to help their
communities, their country, and the world.
In most cases, the people we met for the first time opened up to us, many
even reaching out to help. We owe so much to these people for in many ways they
helped us shape the views being expressed here. We take this opportunity to
express our thanks and appreciation for the courtesy, for the knowledge and the
advice, but most of all, for the encouragement you provided.
My special thanks to Ned Lilly of the Morino Foundation who conducted the
research to support this paper and served as editor for its composition. Thanks
and special acknowledgment are also due to:
- Kaye Gapen of Case Western Reserve University
- Tom Grundner of the National Public Telecomputing Network
- Ken Harmon of the KRH Group
- David Hughes of Old Colorado City Communications
- Frank Odasz of Big Sky Telegraph
- Doug Schuler of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
- Ed Schwartz of the Institute for the Study of Civic Values
- Linda Sowers of MarkeTek Marketing Consultants
- Kevin Thomas Sullivan of Sullivan Consulting International
Each of these people was generous enough to help in reviewing this material
and providing input.
Introduction
"Every time I do get on Free-Net, I need some kind of help, and when I
leave I have truly received the help I need. ... I want you to know that without
Free-Net I would be lost. ... I don’t worry, I am not afraid, I have Free-Net
and my Computer Family of loving and caring friends. These resources, together
with God, will get me through, and I know that I will be able to provide my wife
with the best care possible."
—-Excerpts from a letter published in the newsletter of the Cleveland chapter
of the Alzheimer’s Association
These words speak volumes about the Alzheimer’s Disease Support Center that
was implemented on the Cleveland Free-Net. This letter1 comes from a
man whose wife was suffering terribly; as her caregiver, he was having
difficulty coping. He was able to turn to the Support Center and work through
his problems with the help of other caregivers like himself. The emotion and
feelings this person expresses and the importance he places on electronic
communications as a tool to help him reach out to others, to communicate, and to
share and receive, helps us all understand the potential electronic
communications offers our people, our communities, and our society for effecting
positive social change.
This remarkable potential sets the stage for our discussion of community
networking.
A New Way to Serve the Community
In January of 1993, we began our year of discovery with no predisposed
notions of the importance of electronic communications. Through the course of
our journey we came across a most fascinating phenomena — community networking
facilitated by electronic communications. It has become known by many names —
community computing, community telecomputing, community bulletin boards, civic
networking, telecommunity systems and community information systems. Whatever
the name, we see community networking as a process to serve the local
geographical community — to respond to the needs of that community, and build
solutions to its problems. Community networking in the social sense is certainly
not a new concept, but using electronic communications to extend and amplify it
certainly is.
We consider community networking a process, facilitated by forms of
electronic communications and information, that improves and magnifies the human
communication and interaction within a community by:
- Bringing together people within local communities and focusing their
attention on key issues within the community for debate, deliberation and
resolution
- Organizing human communication and information relevant to the
communities’ needs and problems on a timely basis
- Requiring, engaging and involving — on an ongoing basis — the
participation of a broad base of citizens, including community activists,
leaders, and sponsors, and service providers
- Striving to include people in low-income neighborhoods, those with
disabilities or limited mobility, and the struggling middle class
- Making basic services available at a fair and reasonable cost — or, as
many espouse, at no cost — for broad-based access within the community
- Most importantly, doing what commercial providers find difficult to do
well: represent local culture, local relevance, local pride and a strong sense
of community ownership.
Over the past year and a half we have continued to explore the emergence of,
and impediments to, community networking. The philosophy and principles behind
the community networking movement closely align with our own values; we believe
that the local community is where our toughest social problems — crime,
inadequate education, underemployment — will be solved, by the grass-roots
efforts of the people who have the most personal stake in their solution. It is
here that community networking takes on such relevance in helping people solve
problems and addressing the needs of their day-to-day lives. Clearly, community
networking is an emerging phenomena with the potential to effect societal
transformation.
An Opportunity for Action
This movement of community networking, growing on its own merits in community
after community, is highly consistent with the importance we place on
"grass-roots" innovation, solving problems and satisfying needs within local
community, and instilling or strengthening the sense of ownership and belonging
for the members of local communities. As we learned about community networking,
we were following the activity surrounding the introduction of the National
Information Infrastructure by the Clinton-Gore administration, and the industry
and media’s fascination with the "information highway." Ironically, there has
been little mention of the community-based movement within these national and
industry programs and debates.
This dichotomy between the emergence of community networking at the local
level and its underrecognition and underappreciation at the national level is a
major impediment to community networking. It is a formidable challenge, but also
an exciting opportunity. We see community networking as an important movement
that can help our society better understand the promise of electronic
communication and help communities work toward positive social change —
particularly over the next several years where, as many predict, there will be a
difficult "shake down" period among the national information highway players.
Community networking is a movement that will not only benefit localities, but in
the long run contribute greatly to the realization of the national and global
information infrastructure initiatives. We will support efforts to advance
community networking and to strengthen its acceptance, funding, and social and
technical innovation.
We wish to share with you some of the findings we have made and the
observations by:
- discussing the emergence and evolution of community networking
- providing a time-line of major events in this evolution
- proposing for your consideration a series of suggestions we believe are
important to advancing the community networking movement, and
- concluding with a challenge to help us all make our actions more relevant
to our communities and to the positive application and advancement of
electronic communications for social good
Emergence and Evolution of Community Networking
Some say it all began with the creation of ARPANET in the 1960s, which
evolved into what we now know as the Internet. Subsequent advances in technology
and standards made it possible for something called a "computer" to act more
like a "communicator." The military and scientific worlds were making great
progress, working better and perhaps more efficiently — but throughout the
1970s, the computer network was still very far removed from everyday people in
their communities. One well-known exception was the Berkeley Community Memory
system, where curious people could carry on basic conversations over "dumb"
public terminals. As the medium grew, we saw commercial services like The Source
— which was eventually absorbed into CompuServe — and the emergence of local
bulletin board systems — BBS’s. Some people — the pioneers of community
networking — began to see the potential of real communications systems for
effecting change in their communities.
The Pioneers
Dave Hughes, already a folklore hero, was, and still is, a trailblazer for
community networking. By setting up inexpensive community bulletin boards, he
showed people the power of electronic communications. And, through his tireless
activism on behalf of community networking causes, he showed them what they
could do with that power. Howard Rheingold put it well in his book The Virtual
Community: "Dave’s modus operandi is straightforward and uncomplicated: First,
he brags shamelessly about what he is going to do, then he does it, and then he
shows everyone else how to duplicate his feats."2
Tom Grundner has been called the "father of community networking" — with good
reason. He helped people view community networking as a process more than as a
technology. The medical BBS he called "St. Silicon’s Hospital" grew into the
Cleveland Free-Net — the model for a generation of community networks. And Tom,
of course, founded NPTN, the National Public Telecomputing Network, which has 34
affiliated community systems today, and over 100 more in the organizing stages.
Frank Odasz saw the potential this networking held for rural communities and,
in particular rural education. Frank’s work in Montana education — where the
schools, often the one-room schoolhouse that many of us only know from our
history books, are few and far between — is setting a standard for rural
community networking. He has taken this experience and, with the initial
guidance of Dave Hughes, established a renowned community network called Big Sky
Telegraph. Telegraph has emerged as a national example of the great things
communities — especially rural communities — can accomplish with truly basic
resources.
Ken Phillips brought the community network into even sharper focus, with his
groundbreaking work on the Santa Monica Public Electronic Network (PEN). Santa
Monica PEN advanced our understanding of how the physical, geographical
community can be successfully mirrored, and improved upon in an electronic
community. It also gave us new models for public access to community resources
and the possibility of community networks producing real social benefit.
Richard Civille, of the Center for Civic Networking, has advanced the concept
of civic networking among national policymakers. The mention of civic networks
in the NII: Agenda for Action document, for example, is directly
attributable to his efforts.3 Jack Rickard
and his Boardwatch Magazine have been a tremendous force in advancing the
growth, maturation, and internetworking of bulletin board systems — to the point
where the old distinctions between BBS’s and larger networks have fallen by the
wayside. And Steve Cisler, our host here at Apple, has provided a tremendous
base of support, research, and knowledge for the community networking movement
as a whole.
An Historical Time-Line
By the end of 1991, the first generation of the community networking
phenomenon had truly begun. In addition to Big Sky Telegraph and Santa Monica
PEN, five other communities in Ohio and Illinois had followed the Cleveland
Free-Net model and set up their own local systems — and over a dozen more were
in the planning stages. Bulletin boards and computer conferencing systems like
the Well in San Francisco took on a greater scope, often moving beyond the
hobbyist roots of BBS’s to focus more on the communities around them, as well as
the virtual communities their members enjoyed. At the same time, the first wave
of commercial network providers had moved through the country, as the online
services looked beyond their business customers to home users.
The Surge in Interest
Clearly, the momentum was building in 1991 and 1992. We would suggest,
however, that a major acceleration has occurred over the past 12-18 months, in
which we have seen a dramatic surge in interest in these systems — the
beginnings of what could be a second generation of community networking.
Important events like this conference that brings us here are proliferating —
the first half of 1994 alone has seen half a dozen such gatherings. The Free-Net
phenomenon has grown significantly. And the evolving model of the community
network continues to challenge our previous notions and technologies,
encompassing diverse paradigms such as the planned LaPlaza Telecommunity in New
Mexico; Cupertino’s CityNet; the Smart Valley Project; the recent CommerceNet;
new community network cooperative models in San Francisco and Seattle; the South
Bristol Learning Network in South Bristol England; the community environment
built around Pipeline in New York City ... the list goes on and on.
Our own observations over this time — the course of our discovery period at
the Morino Foundation — certainly confirm this incredible movement and we
suggest four main underlying forces:
- Clinton/Gore NII
The Clinton-Gore administration’s interest
in and introduction of the National Information Infrastructure initiative has
had the most significant impact. Regardless of one’s position on the NII, and
partisan considerations aside, it is undeniable that the initiative has raised
the consciousness of people across the United States, and the world. We
believe this increased awareness has drawn many, new individuals into the
community networking movement, onto the Internet, and other online commercial
services. More importantly, it has attracted a diversified group of people who
will work to complement those already involved.
Additionally, grant
programs from federal groups such as the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration, the National Science Foundation, Defense
Conversion Funding, USDA’s Rural Electrification Administration, the
Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Education, and other
federal and state initiatives will create interest and activity in these
areas. There is no denying that the promise of Al Gore called the "information
superhighway" just a few years ago has caught the public’s attention.
- The Internet
There has been an amazing surge in new usage of
the Internet. According to the Internet Society, there were 4,000 networks
connected to the Internet at the end of 1991. By May of 1993, that number had
tripled — and in the past 12 months, it has more than doubled again, to over
29,000 connect networks. Reachable hosts on the Net have increased from
700,000 at the end of 1991 — to 1.5 million in May of 1993, to over 2.2
million today — with users of all hosts potentially numbering over 10 million!
A new network is connected to the Internet every 20 minutes, and new Internet
services and service providers are everywhere. Adding to this explosion is an
ever-increasing stream of improved software interfaces and services— including
new internetworked services, powerful search tools, friendlier graphical
front-end interfaces, and new information products.
We strongly believe
that the desire to gain local access to the Internet has been one of the
driving forces behind the growing interest and involvement with community
networking. We have seen clear evidence, in online discussions and elsewhere,
that users seeking access are increasingly being directed by word of mouth to
community networks as Internet service providers.
- Information Highways Promotion
The financial commitment by
major industry to developing the "information highway" is generating a great
deal of the interest as well. The telephone and cable companies, publishers,
traditional software and hardware providers, and venture investment firms are
already focusing their attention —- if not large investments —- to capitalize
on the information highways opportunity. This entrepreneurial excitement is
also manifested in thousands of small emerging businesses such as O’Reilly and
Associates, and creative non-profits, such as Internet Multicasting Services.
The perceived and actual progress continues to fuel an interest in community
networking.
- Community Networking Movement
Finally, the community
networking movement has gained tremendous momentum within its own cultural
roots. The positive "word of mouth" surrounding grass-roots community
networkers has been amplified by the three previously discussed forces to help
create a surge in interest and engagement. There has been a marked increase in
the internal support this community provides itself — in terms of electronic
listserves and newsgroups, as well as the marked increase in meetings and
conferences on community networking. An even greater indicator is the
emergence of new technological approaches such as First Class, the OS/2-based
HiCom, Pipeline, and Internet cooperative systems. Finally, and most
indicatively, we point to four substantive actions that begin to truly
legitimize the community networking activity:
- The Ameritech grant won by National Public Telecomputing Network for
collaboration to develop and deliver the Ameritech Learning Village
- The Annenberg, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, and U.S. West grant
won by Frank Odasz and Cynthia Denton of Big Sky Telegraph for rural
education
- The CPB/U.S. West CWEIS grant program that recently awarded $1.4 million
to 12 communities for public education and information online services
- The NTIA TIIAP grant program which is making $26 million in funding
available toward the development of public interest telecommunications
applications and services
While these programs will provide funding, they will barely scratch the
surface of what is really needed. Yet compared to the amount of funding
available even a year ago, it is more than just a significant increase —- all
four of these events have taken place within the last twelve months.
It is striking, in looking back at this period of emergence, how much of the
history of the community networking movement is defined in technological terms,
rather than in "human" language of actual community building. This is one of
many challenges that community networkers will have to address in moving toward
long-term survival and prosperity.
Clearly, the stage has been set. The opportunity is directly in our sights.
There is no assurance, however, that we will be able to marshal the resources,
support, ingenuity, and collaboration that will allow us to collectively
capitalize on this unique, historical opportunity. We will offer the first stage
of a strategy to accomplish this goal, but each community must evolve its own
plan to truly accomplish the broad goals we establish today.
Assessment and Future of Community
Networking
Community networking entrepreneurs face a formidable challenge: Are they part
of a social phenomena that is destined to stall or implode . . . or do they
represent a vibrant force, capable of building on the knowledge they have
accumulated, adapting to a rapidly changing world and community needs, and
ultimately achieving positive, lasting social change in their communities? In 20
years, when we look back on the 1990s, we want to recognize this period as one
of historical significance — as the time when we were able to achieve positive
social change in our communities by using electronic communications as a vital
enabler to bring people together, to share, learn, and work together to solve
their problems.
In all candor, though, we suggest that the first option — a stalling or
implosion — is quite likely and, for some, already predictable. The surge in
interest must be matched with an influx of significant funding and a
step-increase in the functionality and quality of the underlying technology;
otherwise, an implosion is likely. There are few worse situations than an
enormous build-up in interest that goes unsatisfied or, worse, ineffectively
addressed.
There is a window of opportunity in which the community networking movement
must establish itself so in a sustaining manner. This window of opportunity will
not remain open for long as major non-profit organizations and a raft of
commercial interest parties have picked up on the importance and relevance of
this emerging marketplace. This is not a time for community networking parties
to maintain the status quo.
Hope for the Future
The second option — in which community networking lays claim to an
accomplishment of historical significance — is possible. It can be accomplished
— but the same visionaries and social innovators who have evolved community
networking to its current status must recognize that the process has just begun.
The real test lies in their ability to adapt to a dramatically changed and
changing world. Those coming into the movement in this second phase must step
back and see the broad vision of what can be, and work in concert with those who
have gone before.
The visionaries and practitioners of community networking have an opportunity
of historical proportions within their reach. The process of community
networking as it is now commonly understood must move itself to a higher plane,
to a role of greater significance in communities and society at large. We
strongly urge that these visionaries and practitioners recognize the enormous
significance their contributions could have, and that they consider the steps
necessary to position themselves to capitalize on this opportunity.
To this end, we present ten suggestions which we believe are critical to
making the transition to a higher role and significance. These suggestions are
based on the general observation we conducted, our learning of the successes and
impediments community networkers have encountered, and on our own experience in
interpreting similar trends in technology and organizational dynamics.
- Aim High: Work Toward Positive Social Change
We suggest that
the ultimate goals of community networking should address positive social
change — in as many areas and disciplines within our society as possible. To
this end, we suggest that you consider how you, through your community
networks, can enable the following:
- Helping people understand the relevance, and harness the power, of
information and electronic communications to improve their lives
- Stimulating economic growth by helping individuals and businesses become
more adaptive
- Improving the quality and availability of education for all ages and
levels of society
- Helping people engage and improve their government
- Assisting the public and social sectors to reach and engage the people
they serve more effectively
- Improving access to, and the quality of, health care information and
services
- Advancing the state of environmental awareness, monitoring, and
protection.
Most community networking efforts have included
similar goals in their charters, but often these goals have been sublimated to
mere words and not the primary focus of their efforts. Those responsible for
community networking must maintain constant vigilance on ultimate goals to
guide every decision and action. The community network will not produce
results on its own, of course; rather as Dave Hughes has suggested, the online
discussion should be "the springboard for local action."4 The action
itself will take place on the streets, in the neighborhoods, in City Hall or
the courtrooms. Our communities need help, and it is the responsibility of the
community networking movement to enable and facilitate the work of
those in their community capable of introducing that change — not simply
maintaining the status quo.
We have an opportunity of enormous significance and a window of
opportunity to succeed. True success will be achieved if community
networking sets its vision high enough and stays tightly focused on
supporting and enabling positive, social change in their
communities. |
- Serve the Needs of Community
The community networking process must be based on a thorough and
comprehensive understanding of the needs of the community to be served.
Certainly that has been the ideal of community networking, but we suggest that
there is much room for improvement in this regard for most active community
networks.
For example, economic development — the creation of jobs — is
a compelling need in most communities. More focus must be placed on helping
cultivate broad-based economic development and career retraining, and on
teaching aspiring micro-enterprises and entrepreneurs how to benefit from
electronic communications. We suggest this involves a great deal more than
connecting to the Chamber of Commerce or the Small Business Administration’s
Bulletin Board.
We urge you to consider relevance. We suggest
gaining a better understanding of the people and institutions to be served and
of the institutions and services to be involved. Gain an understanding of what
needs are going unmet — at home, in families, in the workplace, for the
unemployed, in the government, social services, and so on. The well-worn
cliche, "if you build it, they will come," is ineffective relative to the
needs of community.
Consider the single mother who worries about her
child getting shot in the locker room . . . and never getting to play on a
"Field of Dreams" at all. That mother could care less about information
infrastructure or community networking. Chances are, no one asked her what
she might need from a network, how she could use this powerful tool to
better her life — and with this inadvertent omission, another exclusive
club is created to which she will never belong. Watch how vacant the
"information highway" will become if this situation is allowed to
spread.
Reach out into the community, talk to people, make a concerted
effort to understand their needs — and then help them understand how the
services of the community network can help. Such outreach and engagement
will ensure a buy-in among the people of the community and an ongoing
relevance to the needs. |
- Engage the Broader Community
The community network needs to
represent the interests of the community it serves. Many of today’s groups
must make a concerted effort to move beyond their current scope, which often
represents only the interests and views of the people who organized and built
the network. The community networking programs that will succeed in the long
run will be those that have maintained a focus on the multiplicity of needs in
the community and have effectively reached out and engaged the full spectrum
of their neighbors.
The key to answering this question is to focus on
those using the network to help effect positive social change. People are
looking for results, solutions to their problems — not network access. Or, as
Frank Odasz of Big Sky Telegraph likes to say, "real benefit for real people_"
That means, in building community networks, we should seek out and involve
those individuals in the communities most capable of making things happen
and ushering in changes. We need people who are willing to question the
status quo, to ask what is needed, and to get good things done right now. The
buy-in from these people in the community is the best insurance that the
community network can address the broad range of challenges posed by the
community.
We suggest two ideas to better engage and involve the
community, whether you are just starting a community network or if your
network is already up and running:
- Expand and/or recompose your Boards of Directors. Many people take this
for granted, but a good Board of Directors is crucial. By "good," we mean
composed of these active, engaged agents of community change — people from
diverse backgrounds, with a range of relevant opinions and experiences. Your
Boards should be selected to include: those who will connect you to key
bases of support; those who can help you raise funding; those who will
contribute management know-how; and most importantly, those who believe in
the potential of community networking and who will work to help sell and
engage the people and institutions of the community. The Board should be
composed of people who will continually challenge the community network to
grow, to develop, and to improve — to question its own status quo.
- Actively engage the community. This is a process of marketing and,
hence, to many an unknown. We suggest that you proactively reach out to the
community, doing so with a formal and informal marketing communications
program. Establish ongoing relations with the local media to provide
occasional press coverage; conduct regular meetings to provide status and
collect input and requirements from various population groups; conduct
programs to educate people in awareness, competencies, and application on
electronic communications; establish programs to promote what is happening
on the network — relating the success stories, how people have been helped,
where benefit has been realized, and when lives have been changed. More
importantly, collaborate with parties who can serve as distribution channels
to promote the services — the computer stores in the region, the public
library, the chamber of commerce, the interfaith religious associations, and
the like. In this way, you can maintain a constant presence and seamlessly
become part of the fabric of the community.
Make it a top priority to compose a Board of Directors that will
challenge you, represent all the people you serve, and, in turn,
strengthen your ties to the community. Establish a marketing
communications program to proactively and deliberately reach out and
engage community members . . . to enable the community network to become
an integral part of the community and an important part of the people’s
daily lives. |
- Broadly Re-Define Support
Community networks, once they
achieve certain levels of success or critical mass, must have a formal
"infrastructure" and full-time staff. The pioneers of community networking
have done incredible, absolutely unbelievable work — by and large, it’s been
in their spare time, around the edges, maintaining systems at 2:00 in the
morning from computers in the basements of their homes. This model will
continue to work for small systems that remain satisfied with a relatively
narrow focus —- but it clearly will not hold for most community networks and
the demands they will face.
The staffing requirement is much more than
someone to administer the network. Certainly, network administration is an
important responsibility, but is far less relevant than to long-term success
than staff to provide community engagement, promotional seminars, fund
raising, periodic community needs assessment, education and training,
telephone support, and even consulting services.
Ironically, the more
successful a community network becomes, the greater the demand will be for
more services, improved access, and better reliability. The community network
that does not respond to these increasing demands is only creating an
opportunity for another not-for-profit or commercial service to capture its
clientele.
Another important point to bear in mind is that the skills
to manage a growing community network are very different than those required
to create the network. Actually, these skills must change as the community
network evolves and grows.
Plan a well-defined infrastructure and staff it with full-time
people who can be augmented by professional volunteers. Seek good staff,
with a desire to help, possessing great people skills, communication
skills and facilitation skills —- along with the technical orientation
essential to the nature of the system. |
- Establish a Sustaining Economic Model
Community networks,
large or small, absolutely must establish an economic model for their
sustained operation. It is a question of economic viability, really of
survival —- not a debate over "free access." Clearly, this is an area of
heated debate and concern to existing community networks. Recent discussions
in the COMMUNET and FREENET conferences, where pieces of such economic models
are starting to come together, have been most encouraging on this
front.
To be sure, individual communities can make their own
determinations about what sort of access they want to subsidize for what
groups of people. Tom Grundner and others have passionately and convincingly
argued for no-cost availability of basic services; indeed, this question is
being debated on a national scale in the federal Information Infrastructure
Task Force, among other places. Bear in mind that free access to networks will
almost always be structured around off-peak times and functions, riding in the
"electronic empty spaces," as it were.
Community networks must
establish a sustainable funding base from fee-based-services and sustained
funding sources. Government and other grant monies can be used to supplement
this base, but a sustaining economic model not be dependent on grant funding.
This requires a more creative approach to earning revenues. Here is a partial
list of possible considerations:
- Basic subscription charge of a nominal amount to all subscribers to the
service
- Subscription charges that are tied to specific types of services
- Provider charges that are applied to organizations that wish to use the
community network and/or post information on it
- Local subsidies that may be directly linked to jurisdictional taxation
or levies
- Usage fees for education, support and consulting
- Sustained grant funders that commit to long-term funding.
We must keep in mind that "free" public libraries, to which an analogy has
often been made, have always had a taxation-based economic model to ensure
their continued operation.
To serve the needs of the community the community network must
first survive. To survive and expand to meet current and future demand,
it is absolutely essential that an economic model for self-sufficiency
be defined and implemented. Anything short of this imperative represents
a disservice to the community being served.
|
- Build A Strong and Open Technological Base
Community networks must work toward building a stronger, more accessible,
and more functional base of technology and telecommunications. To be sure,
thi>s is first a problem of funding, but equally imperative are vision and
experience once funding is available. It is, moreover, a fundamental challenge
to the long-term survival of the communication medium that community
networking represents. Questions of growth and scale are more than just adding
more staff, modems, and disk space. Here, then are five basic areas for
building a stronger technological base:
- Telecommunications
It is critical to build a
telecommunications capacity to be able to handle a high percentage of peak
load activity. Systems epitomized by a perpetual busy signal will discourage
use and eventually lose their clientele to an alternative service — this is
the undeniable rule of online services.
- Community Networking Software
The core community networking
systems, Free-Port, Big Sky Telegraph, First Class, and others are good
technologies, but in current forms lack the robustness, scalability, network
interoperability, and user friendliness that community networkers will
demand. Community networking leaders should collaborate to help advance the
state of technical functionality . . . or watch as alternative technologies
rapidly pass by the capabilities of community networking systems — again
with the net result of discouraging use and eventually losing
clientele.
- Systems Management
Few organizations recognize the need for
industrial-strength systems management. Functions such as backup/recovery,
disaster preparedness, security access and encryption, capacity and
performance management, problem diagnosis, license servers, and a host of
other considerations should be considered, again on a scaleable basis. These
may seem like far away issues to the person in a small town that is trying
to bring up a First Class rural network, but to many growing community
networks this will be an issue of increasing relevance and concern.
- Network Gateways and Interfaces
Community networks should
serve as the local hub for the larger networked services, as well as support
cross-communication with other community networks —- allowing
interoperability, and filtering and structuring information into a local
community context. In addition to the technical function, moreover,
community networks should act as a cultural connection to the larger
networks as well. By "larger networks," we mean nonprofit networks such as
Handsnet and the various nets under the Institute for Global Communications;
corporate and governmental networks that want to share certain information
with the community; even a commercial service. It is not at all beyond
possibility that the major online service providers would consider
establishing inexpensive gateways to community networks — just as they do to
Internet electronic mail today.
- Distributed Systems Interoperability
There is no one technical
solution that is right for all communities —- or even for all communities
within a local community. In a very real sense, we are all re-learning the
lessons of how organizations have to adapt their thinking . . . away from
the centralized model for information systems to a much more distributed
approach, where the functionality is vested in each department or user.
Centralized systems fall short when the key is local ownership of
information, interconnection, and seamless interoperability. You must move
beyond the one-system approach, and act as the integrator of community
services, rather than the controller. The community network may provide one
central system, but more important is providing the enabling technology to
interconnect —- thereby enabling networks run by schools, churches, public
libraries and the like to work with the clients of these networks. It is
this core system, as well as internetworked connections and information
integration capability, that we believe will typify the successful community
networks of the future.
Work to build your technical capacity and functionality to
ensure openness and interoperability — it will be a key differential
on which people judge the community network in comparison to other
not-for-profit and commercial services. The importance of this factor
grows disproportionately as the community places a greater dependence
on the services provided by the network.
|
- Make Information Relevant to Your Community
Local relevance.
That is where the community network can make its mark and distinguish itself
from the commercial services and other players. Since community networks are
locally owned and operated, you can organize the vast amount of local,
statewide, national and international information services and resources . . .
around the local needs that you uniquely understand.
That could
mean taking the reams of federal housing information, and putting in a usable
context for a local homeless shelter. Or organizing scholarship information to
fit the needs of disadvantaged local students. Or coordinating the efforts of
the multitude of homes for battered women that might exist within a single
community, whose staff are unaware of each other’s existence. The key is that
the information, from financial data to the oral traditions of an Indian
tribe, is placed in a context people can use toward the fulfillment of
community needs.
Kevin Thomas Sullivan, a consultant in Minneapolis,
put it well on the COMMUNET list: "I believe that we can consciously choose to
use information technology to help facilitate community. Community networks
will continue to thrive if they help to facilitate community. They will perish
if they view themselves simply as alternative information providers. Let the
commercial companies provide all the information they want; they will not be
able to facilitate community because community is by definition local."5
Increase the relevance of your networks by adding value to the
oceans of unfiltered information that are out there — be more than a
posting service or pass-through service. Gather information from outside
sources and place it in a local context, making it relevant to the
day-to-day lives of the people in the community you serve.
|
- Ensure Broad-based Access
We are here today because of our
deeply held belief that communities must focus on improving the ease of
access to relevant information and knowledge. The word "access" means many
different things to different people. We would offer three basic points for
discussion:
- Points of Access
There must be much greater physical
access through points of entry to community networks. We do not subscribe to
the theory that every home will have the capacity —- or desire —- to have a
network connection, at least during this decade. Consider that even today as
much as 10% of the people in the United States have no telephone service,
and 35% manage to exist without cable TV. We applaud the Clinton-Gore
administration’s charge to connect all the nation’s schools, hospitals,
clinics, and libraries by the year 2000 and appreciate the fact that more
and more homes and offices are equipped with computers and modems —- but
there is still an enormous percentage of our population that will remain
unaffected. We must take action to ensure access for working parents,
isolated rural workers — farmers, teachers, and nurses — the elderly, the
youth we strive to keep safe and off the streets at night, and the social
intermediaries who are dealing with our communities’ most difficult and
threatening problems.
Encourage the provision of points of access
throughout the community, placing the access where it has the chance of
engendering the greatest good — probably not most public offices and
shopping malls, as is so often espoused. Instead, focus on those outposts
that are already in the community, where the local heroes have gained the
respect of their neighbors — locations like churches, the Salvation Army,
Boys’ and Girls’ clubs, community youth centers, unemployment offices, Head
Start centers, shelters, and wherever you can find social intermediaries who
are making a difference, who are truly committed. It is these individuals
that will make the difference in training and education, putting a human
face on the community networking technology.
We encourage
community networks to encompass the funding, technical support, equipment
and related training for points of access as part of the network’s charter.
Consider this requirement within your economic models and support
infrastructures.
- Ease of use
For many would-be users, a blank computer screen
is as formidable a barrier as a deadbolt. Certainly, computer interfaces
have improved markedly in the past few years, especially for Internet use,
but we have inched up to 1, perhaps 2 on a scale of 1 to 10. It is still a
chore for most people and a barrier to many.
The ease of use question
goes beyond the human/computer interface and the reliability and support of
the system. Ease of use must also consider the needs of multi-lingual
communities. Therefore, what is more important for such a community — a
graphical user interface or multilingual support? Some networks must support
cultures that rely on the spoken word far more than written communication.
These cultural minorities certainly do not always fit our definition of
economically or socially disadvantaged — but they lack access just the same.
And what about individuals with disabilities who cannot see or hear the
system? How many community networks today make provisions for the blind,
deaf, or non-mobile? These are all questions that we must incorporate into
our grand schema of community networking. Dr. C. Everett Koop, speaking at
the Public Interest Summit sponsored by the Benton Foundation, March of this
year, estimated that over 30% of our general population is from accessing
these technologies in some manner.
- Access to Knowledge
The final consideration is one of
filtering and context. Many say it is the difference between information and
knowledge. Our society is already drowning in information, unfiltered chaos
whose worth or value we often have no way to judge. Even more disconcerting
is that we are rapidly adding to this base of information at an increasing
rate. In a given week, we may hear of half a dozen studies on the effects of
alcohol on the human body — does it eat our livers, or does it fortify our
hearts? How does the citizen sort this all out? Network access must
synthesize information for the benefit of the community and structure it to
solve community problems and satisfy community needs. Equally importantly,
it should encourage all providers of information to think in like terms.
Being able to access the "right" or "relevant" information, in the end, may
be the most important facet of access.
Work with local institutions, governmental, not-for-profit
organizations, socially conscious businesses to provide multiple points
of access. Develop your systems with an emphasis on ease-of-use and
multiple-interface solutions for the full spectrum of your clientele.
Make the deliverables in your network worth accessing in the first place
—- by filtering and organizing information and knowledge in such a way
that it is relevant to the people you serve.
|
- Prepare for Competitive Times Ahead
It may seem strange to
speak of competition to individuals who have in many cases volunteered their
time and effort to help build local community networks. But competition is
inevitable. Consider the dialogue in the listserves and newsgroups, such as
this observation made in the COMMUNET list by Ed Schwartz of the Institute for
the Study of Civic Values: "The average citizen could care less whether a
service is commercial or community-driven . . . If a community network lacks
the resources to offer services that commercial services can, it will lose."6
Even
more relevant is that the commercial sector and its supporting venture
investment firms are beginning to take note of the potential of the local
community. Community networking practitioners should, at a minimum, pay
attention to the likes of American Online, E-World, and the Imagination
Network —- for they could well provide relevant community-based services. Not
to mention interests such as Ziff Publishing, a combined AT&T/Lotus Notes
service, the expected entry into commercial online services by Microsoft, the
various cable programmers, and a host of other initiatives. No threat or
opportunity, however, is as great as that posed by the newspapers, local
television and radio stations —- and, to a lesser degree, the public
television and radio stations in the local communities. The newspaper business
and television networks, in particular, possess a vast amount of local
information about the community — probably much more than other services could
amass without great expense and effort. Clearly, should the newspapers,
television, or radio stations consider providing community networking services
they could either pose a formidable — if not dominating — competitor to
current community networks. Of course, in a more positive sense, these
institutions could be your greatest collaborators, as several of the recent
CWEIS grantees may soon discover. The local news media in particular can be
valuable partners, given their understanding of how to frame local issues and
concerns and their vast repositories of locally relevant knowledge and
experience.
The challenge to those in community networking is to recognize
that they are in an extremely dynamic and fluid situation — politically,
economically, socially and technologically. Competition for access to
the local community will be real. As in all other walks of life today,
the community network should be looking at the local and external
collaborations that will enable it to continue to serve its
community. |
- Collaborate to Represent a Powerful Movement
We have many
times referred to the community networking movement. We do believe that there
is such a movement underway, although highly unstructured at this time. To
truly succeed, however, community networking needs a more unified voice and
presence. Issues such as federal funding, foundation support, communications
legislation and other public policy matters are being strongly influenced by
industry, global networks such as the Internet, and even national
not-for-profit services Community networking has had a small voice, but even
that was highly fragmented —- and, at times, the voices speaking for community
networking were inconsistent or in conflict with each other.
We are
not proposing that all of the various factions join together into a unified
organization for that would not work, nor would it be productive. Today, there
are a host of parties representing community networking — National Public
Telecomputing Network, the Center for Civic Networking, Big Sky Telegraph,
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility, the Community Learning
Information Network (CLIN), and Learning and Information Networks for
Community Telecomputing . . . to name but a few. Additionally, there are
scores of parties aspiring to reach national prominence such as CityNet,
CapAccess, and La Plaza Telecommunity.
Our request is simple — practice
what you have preached on the merits of collaboration and networking to this
community. You certainly have one common interest — the advancement of
community networking.
Put aside your special interests and join forces —- for the first
time —- for the advancement of community networking and your
constituents. It is time to reach out to one another, to work together,
to share information, and to help each other. Just as the business world
has reluctantly come to grips with the fact that you have to compete and
collaborate with your neighbors in a professional manner, it is time for
community networking leaders to do the same. This, indeed, is the
challenge to those leaders. |
Seize the Opportunity!
We would like to take this opportunity to give acknowledgment, and our
sincere thanks, to those who have helped guide and develop our thinking over the
past year. A thank you to the literally hundreds of people who have met with us,
shared their knowledge and experiences with us, and given of their time and
themselves. Many of you are in this room today.
In summary, we would call upon community networks to reexamine their
operations, to focus on lasting, positive social change, and to build networks
as vehicles for community action. You have the opportunity to take years
of hard-earned knowledge and experience and build a powerful new communications
medium that can really help people change their lives. To that end, let us
restate our ten suggestions toward ensuring the survival, the relevance, and the
eventual prosperity of community networking:
- Aim High: Work Toward Positive Social Change — set your vision on
the ultimate goals of positive social change in your community, and maintain
that focus in all that you do
- Serve the Needs of Community — build and develop your network to
meet the ever-changing needs of your community
- Engage the Broader Community — expand and recompose your leadership
to represent all the people you serve and establish an effective
communications program within the community
- Broadly Re-Define Support — establish an infrastructure, a support
plan and full-time staff to support the community network
- Establish a Sustaining Economic Model — move aggressively toward
self-sufficiency and end dependence on outside funding
- Build A Strong and Open Technological Base — understand the issues
of growth, scale, and interoperability —- and how they relate to your system
- Make Information Relevant to Your Community — add value and context
to the vast amounts of information available, by filtering and structuring it
toward your local needs
- Ensure Broad-based Access — work to provide comprehensive physical
access to your network, improve its ease of use, and make useful relevant
knowledge a staple of its appeal
- Prepare for Competitive Times Ahead — take an objective look at
other not-for-profits, as well as commercial services, and look to strategic
partnerships whenever possible
- Collaborate to Represent a Powerful Movement — community networking
leaders must reach out to one another, share information and resources, and
speak to the world with a common voice —- toward common goals
The challenge we collectively face is: "How do we make community networking
succeed by building on the formidable successes achieved by the pioneers of this
new medium . . . to construct a grander, more encompassing, and higher vision?".
A vision to support significant social action — of truly helping people change
and improve their lives. We implore those of you "in the field" today to unite
in this purpose and put aside philosophical differences. The grass-roots spirit
and innovation that have fueled this explosion of talented, motivated, caring
people is too big, too important, indeed, too crucial to our development as a
people, to be stopped now.
You have a chance to affect history. The ramifications of what we do, how we
grow the true concept and practice of community networking, will be felt for
generations to come.
We urge you to seize the opportunity, to make this next step, truly be a part
of history. We at the Morino Institute would welcome the opportunity to work
with you and to help you in this quest . . . to build this communication medium
into a lasting force for changing people’s lives.
On behalf of the Morino Foundation, the newly formed Morino Institute, and
our staff that have worked so hard to get us to this point of introduction,
thank you to Apple Computer for the use of their facilities, and a special
thanks for Steve Cisler for his initiative to conduct this conference.
Good luck to you all and we look forward to when our paths will cross again.
Appendix A
The following letter is reprinted from the March 1994 newsletter of the
Cleveland chapter of the Alzheimer’s Association. The Alzheimer’s Disease
Support Center on the Cleveland Free-Net was implemented in 1989, and is
directed by Dr. Kathy Smyth of Case Western Reserve University.
"Free-Net: How to Regain Your Sanity Without Leaving Home"
by Mike Braun
Dear Computer Family:
Do you think in the fall of 1984, that Dr. Tom Grundner of the
Department of Family Medicine, Case Western Reserve University had us in
mind?
I wonder if he realizes that the coping mechanism he created is one of
our greatest assets?
Does he know that he gave to us, and any Alzheimer’s caregiver, a 24
hour per day, seven day per week Support Group? As a doctor, he was aware
of mental stress and the necessity to get rid of it. But was he thinking
of us?
The holiday season officially ended for me yesterday, and I am in a
very sentimental, sad mood. Once again, I must use Free-Net to help me get
back to normal. For some unknown reason, I really don’t want to dwell on
my feelings, but I do need to talk to my computer family. Every time I do
get on Free-Net, I need some kind of help, and when I leave I have truly
received the help I need.
Sometimes, I can’t write, or don’t know how to express my feelings, so
I just read the articles that you have posted.
Do you know that reading these articles has caused me to cry? The
problems that some of you are presently going through will soon be mine,
and I can feel the frustration and pain that you have. How I suffer along
with you! My prayers are no longer for my wife and myself, they now
include all of you. I pray that God gives you some relief.
Your articles have provided me with so many answers to my questions.
You never tell me what to do, you only share your own experiences with me,
and these experiences always provide me with the direction I must take.
Fortunately, we all realize that even though most of the problems we
have are either the same or very similar, each of us is a unique creature
of God, and being involved in this terrible disease, only the individual
can make a decision. None of us want advice; we desperately need help.
We need someone who really listens. We need someone who really cares
about me. We need each other.
I wonder if Dr. Grundner had us in mind back in 1984? I doubt it. I
know that he had to be a caring, and sharing person. I know that he must
have emotional "highs" just thinking about some of the things that could
occur on his creation.
Dr. Grundner, I want to thank you. I want you to know that without
Free-Net I would be lost. Your work has given to me a source of comfort
and relief whenever I need it. You have saved me on more occasions than I
want to remember. Being a caregiver for an Alzheimer’s-related dementia
(Pick’s Disease) is a nightmare. I have been a caregiver for a very short
time, and statistically I know that I will be involved for a very long
time. I don’t worry, I am not afraid, I have Free-Net and my Computer
Family of loving and caring friends. These resources, together with God,
will get me through, and I know that I will be able to provide my wife
with the best care possible.
I pray for you too, doctor, and thank god that He gave you the ability
to create the most helpful vehicle a caregiver can possibly
have. |
Appendix B - A Brief History of Community
Networking
The following represents some of the key events in the history of community
networking. Permission is hereby granted to reprint all or part of the
following, giving due credit to the Morino Institute.
1969 ARPANET (precursor to Internet) created — first American
networking community
1972 InterNetworking Working Group (INWG) created to address need
for establishing agreed-upon protocols (Chairman: Vinton Cerf)
1973 First international connections to ARPANET: England and Norway
1976 UUCP (Unix-to-Unix copy) developed at AT&T Bell Labs
1977 EIES (Electronic Information Exchange Service), first general
academic computer conferencing system created by Murray Turoff. Publication of
seminal Network Nation by Hiltz and Turoff
1978 Computer Bulletin Board System, Chicago — first BBS
established by Ward Christiansen, who also creates XMODEM protocol. CommuniTree
BBS established in Santa Cruz
1979 USENET established using UUCP Telecomputing Corporation of
America (TCA) — first dial-up computer service Berkeley Community Memory project
established — public terminal-based communications service
1980 Old Colorado City Electronic Cottage, community political
action BBS established by Dave Hughes. 50,000 calls by 8,600 persons in 3 years;
pioneers in electronic democracy TCA becomes The Source CompuServe established
1981 Penrose Library, Colorado Springs, first public library in
country to give citizens dial-up modem access to "Maggie’s Place" BITNET
established, linking universities Computer Professionals for Social
Responsibility (CPSR) formed
1982 INWG establishes TCP/IP standard
1983 Name server developed at U-Wisconsin (users no longer required
to know exact path to other systems) First course for college credit taught
entirely online for Colorado Technical College, via the Source
1984 "St. Silicon’s Hospital and Information Dispensary" — Tom
Grundner’s medical BBS, Cleveland Domain Name Server (DNS) introduced. Number of
Internet hosts breaks 1,000 First version of FidoNet released by Tom Jennings as
shareware, providing inter-BBS mail, conferencing, file transfer on free local
BBS’s "Electronic Cafe" established in Santa Monica
1985 The Well established by Stewart Brand in Sausalito, California
1986 Cleveland Free-Net established, with CWRU Free-Port software
NSFNET created (backbone speed of 56Kbps) First international FidoNet conference
held, Colorado Springs Apple II-based "FredNet" for educators created by Al
Rogers, San Diego
1987 Youngstown (OH) Free-Net established (second Free-Net system)
Number of Internet hosts breaks 10,000 Rogers Bar in Old Colorado City puts RJ11
jacks in booths. TWICS conferencing system established in Tokyo; NHK Television
starts public-access BBS in Japanese and English
1988 Big Sky Telegraph established by Frank Odasz and Dave Hughes,
Dillon, Montana "Internet worm" virus burrows through the Net
1989 Santa Monica PEN established, running Caucus conferencing
software Free-Net II (2nd version of CWRU Free-Port software) implemented in
Cleveland National Public Telecomputing Network (NPTN) founded Number of
Internet hosts breaks 100,000
1990 Heartland (IL) Free-Net, Tri-State Online (OH), Medina County
(OH) Free-Net established ARPANET ceases to exist First relay between a
commercial electronic mail carrier (MCI Mail) and the Internet Electronic
Frontier Foundation founded by Mitch Kapor First BBS established in then-Soviet
Union; Americans dial in
1991 WAIS released by Thinking Machines Corporation Gopher released
by U-Minnesota Lorain County (OH) Free-Net established Dr. George Johnston
teaches course in Chaos Physics from MIT to one-room schools in Montana,
Colorado, Wyoming by UUCP and FidoNet-linked BBS’s.
1992 Internet Society founded by Vinton Cerf World Wide Web
released by CERN Number of Internet hosts breaks 1,000,000 CapAccess established
in Washington, DC Cupertino Connection established Tom Grundner leaves CWRU to
devote full-time to NPTN Wellington (NZ) CityNet, Buffalo Free-Net, Victoria
Free-Net (Canada) established Civic Networking Roundtable in Washington, DC —
sponsored by CPSR, EFF, Rockefeller Foundation Center for Civic Networking (CCN)
formed by Miles Fidelman, John Altobello, Richard Civille Boardwatch magazine
reports 55,000 local BBSes in U.S., 25,000 global FidoNet BBSes.
1993 Big Sky Telegraph becomes Internet-accessible National Capital
Free-Net (Canada), Denver Free-Net, COIN, Tallahassee Free-Net, Seattle
Community Net, Prairienet (IL), Ocean State Free-Net, Great Lakes Free-Net,
Free-Net Erlangen- Nuernburg (Germany), Dayton Free-Net, CIAO! (Canada)
established Cupertino CityNet established Blacksburg Electronic Village
established International Free-Net Conference held in Ottawa CCN-sponsored Civic
Networking Roundtable in Washington, DC NII: Agenda for Action published
by Clinton-Gore administration Americans Communicating Electronically (ACE)
formed Corporation for Public Broadcasting announces CWEIS grant program Mosaic
released by UIUC Global Network Navigator released by O’Reilly Associates First
Class released by SoftArc Prodigy offers Internet-connected e-mail
1994 Tom Grundner conducts telecast with PBS affiliates to team for
CPB/CWEIS grant ORION, Rio Grande Free-Net, Los Angeles Free-Net established
Public Interest Summit held in Washington — Benton Foundation et al. Apple
Computer and the Morino Foundation fund development of the NPTN Rural
Information Network America Online offers USENET, gopher, WAIS O’Reilly/Spry
"Internet in a Box," NetManage "Chameleon" released — personal dial-up Net
access Pipeline — New York City community net-over-Internet software released
Dave Hughes and son, David, Jr., create HiCom, a low-cost generic community
network system on OS/2. Used to create bilingual SalsaNet in Albuquerque
Internet co-operatives in Seattle, Colorado Indian owned Arrowhead Industries of
Denver starts network to link all Indian Reservations. NTIA announces NII
request for proposals DIAC — CPSR conference Apple Conference on Community
Networking
THANKS TO: Hobbes' Internet Timeline by Robert H Zakon; John Kurilec and
Elizabeth Reid of NPTN; David Hughes; Steve Cisler; Richard Civille; Howard
Rheingold.
Notes
1: The complete letter is reprinted in Appendix A. Back
2: Rheingold, Howard, The Virtual Community. Addison-Wesley, 1993.
Back
3: The National Information Infrastructure: Agenda for Action.
Information Infrastructure Task Force, September 1993. Back
4: Personal conversation with David Hughes, April 26, 1994. Back
5: Kevin Thomas Sullivan, in "Communet: Community and Civic Network
Discussion List," April 8, 1994. Back
6: Ed Schwartz, in "Communet: Community and Civic Network
Discussion List," April 8, 1994. Back
|
 |