.

A L S O__T O D A Y Information theory and practice By Matthew DeBord Once upon a time, "information" didn't even exist. Now it's everywhere. Two new books tell how that happened - - - - - - - - - - T A B L E__T A L K Discuss the programs you can't function without and why in the Digital Culture area of Table Talk - - - - - - - - - - R E C E N T L Y You've got sendmail By Andrew Leonard Eric Allman's free program makes sure your e-mail gets through. Now it's going commercial (12/11/98) The 21st Challenge No. 16 Results By Charlie Varon and Jim Rosenau Mystery misdirected e-mail (12/11/98) What does technology want? By R.U. Sirius Kevin Kelly talks about his "New Rules for the New Economy" (12/10/98) Is Rio grand? By Janelle Brown With the new MP3 player, the future of online music distribution is here now -- it's just a bit slow (12/09/98) Internet activism, Czech-style By Mark Schapiro The Communists are yesterday's target -- today, it's the phone company's Net-access rate hikes (12/08/98) - - - - - - - - - - BROWSE THE 21ST FEATURES ARCHIVES - - - - - - - - - - 21st Log Make money fast on the Internet!

INTERNET CENSURE-SHIP | PAGE 1, 2 - - - - - - - - - - You said that the Representatives didn't think e-mail is as important as letters -- why do you think this is, and do you think it will change? I think a lot of the people there haven't had the Net be a part of their lives; e-mail seems too easy to them. Anything that's new, people need to learn about. In the next couple of years they are going to learn that, in fact, the messages they get online are as important, or more important. Ultimately what the representative is concerned about is those voters who have influence -- and people that are online, frankly, tend to be a little better-educated and better-connected. So things could turn around in the next couple of years. What kind of impact is the Internet having on activism? Is it making it more accessible? I don't know how I could have done this without the Net. It made it easy for people to be heard -- they could take one minute and sign the petition, or take five or 10 minutes and send it to their friend. The e-mail was a really efficient means of communicating with everybody -- people could sign up as a volunteer and get as involved as they wanted to be with actions that we suggested in the e-mails. It's a low-pressure way to be involved. Online activism is a new way to be active, and I think it's a very effective way to be active. It's good for democracy -- it keeps people feeling involved. And it's a great new opportunity to create community. Have you seen previous examples of this kind of online activism that have been successful? I haven't. Did any previous online activist movements inspire you? It's a pretty simple concept. The one petition that was done before that we certainly heard about was the one protesting the Communication Decency Act, and in fact that was quite effective. It got a lot of people's attention, it got media attention. Did it get the end result it wanted? No. But ultimately the CDA didn't end up a law. So do you consider Censure and Move On a success? Certainly, it's been successful in terms of sheer numbers -- but what about impact on the government? We felt it was very successful -- in each case along the way here, we felt like we had impact. When it came to the House vote, we found out through the press that at least one fence-sitter was influenced by all the calls and e-mail. Then there was another Democrat who said he was "bolstered" by it -- that's hearsay, but it's affirming. The election results were very affirming, and people felt very good after that. For a lot of people, this was their first political act. The Republican Party is trying to foreclose even giving the representatives the ability to vote on censure. Our main point right now is that we at least need the opportunity for representatives to vote on censure, and that they shouldn't be forced to vote party line. In this issue, of all issues, people should be allowed to vote their conscience. If we can just influence that, we've been successful. But it does seem like the impeachment is going forward anyway despite expressions of popular opposition. Do you think that the politicians will listen to grass-roots efforts like yours? Or is it like banging a drum to try to distract a charging herd of elephants? I think it's had quite a bit of impact. A lot of conversations started because of Censure and Move On, most of them healthy. The fact is that the election sent a message. That the Republicans acknowledged that people at large were not happy with the pursuit of impeachment is important. What's going on now is a real disappointment. It's a disappointment that they did not take that and say, "We have to respect the feedback we've gotten." Nonetheless, when the newly elected officials come in, it will be a new House and Senate. And representatives are getting so many calls right now that the switchboards are swamped. So, we're certainly not as effective as we want to be -- we'd love to have a magic wand -- but I think we're darned effective considering how much the people that have signed on are motivated to make the phone calls, send the e-mails, go to their [representatives'] office. If people can express their views so clearly and vocally and still be ignored by politicians, does that bode ill for activism in general? You can look at it both ways. Certainly it's going to discourage some people; on the other hand, it may encourage others to organize more effectively. For pete's sake, we only put this thing up Sept. 22, and we've never done anything like this. I'm amazed at what has happened in two months. You're right: If the impeachment goes forward anyway, it will discourage some people. But I hope it will also motivate others in the future. SALON | Dec. 14, 1998 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E-mail Janelle Brown.