Once again, Thomas Friedman proves why he's one of the most inconsistent opinion writers in the history of the known universe. Today's op-ed piece is actually useful: he points out that our model of having network connectivity paid for by the utilities is actually hampering our growth. Moreover, we can actually harness technology to improve government.
The main subject of the piece is a Democratic candidate for NYC public advocate, Andrew Rasiej, who makes the following
comment:
One elected official by himself can't solve the problems of eight million people," Mr. Rasiej argued, "but eight million people networked together can solve one city's problems. They can spot and offer solutions better and faster than any bureaucrat. ... The party that stakes out this new frontier will be the majority party in the 21st century. And the Democrats better understand something - their base right now is the most disconnected from the network.
This raises an interesting point. From what I've seen, this is one of the situations where the Democrats occupy both ends of the extremes, with the Republicans in the middle. It is probably true at this point that the average middle-class family has some Internet connectivity (broadband, DSL, or dial-up) and most likely cell-phone access as well. However, some of the core Democrat groups (lower-income urban families) are not nearly so fortunate--and this will probably place them at a distinct disadvantage in the future, as more and more technological literacy will be required just to function in society.
Perhaps turning New York into a WiFi hot zone isn't the best strategy--but how can we overcome the "digital divide?"