SELLING THE INTERNET: A CULTURAL STUDIES APPROACH TO PUBLIC RELATIONS PRACTICE IN THE HIGH TECH INDUSTRY by Thomas J. Mickey,Ph.D. Bridgewater State College Department of Communication Studies and Theatre Arts Bridgewater, MA 02324 tmickey@bridgew.edu SELLING THE INTERNET: A CULTURAL STUDIES APPROACH TO PUBLIC RELATIONS PRACTICE IN THE HIGH TECH INDUSTRY Abstract This study examines the value system proposed by high tech public relations. The values and ideology of corporate pr favor the industry and not necessarily the public good. In the 1930's many argued that television would make for a more educated society but television became a vehicle to sell goods and services. The Internet is currently moving along the same path and becoming largely an advertising vehicle. In Massachusetts an organization called MassNetworks was set up in 1996 to ensure that the Internet gets into the classroom. MassNetworks is a non-profit organization whose board is composed of educators, government representatives, but mostly executives from computer organizations like Mass. Software Council, Computer World, Virtual Entertainment, Quantum, Mathsoft, and Digital. Who stands to benefit from the insertion of computer technology in the classroom? The promotion of Internet as an invaluable tool is the message of the computer industry, and only subsequently the voice of educators and the government. The computer industry argues that the only path to quality education is the Internet. Don't other voices need to be heard? Using public relations material, especially the media event called Netday of Fall 1996 and Spring 1997 which was sponsored by MassNetworks in schools around the state, this paper takes a critical, cultural studies approach to modern public relations practice. A critical theory of public relations questions the media messages of a product or service because the commercial concerns may or may not be in the public interest. # I. INTRODUCTION A Compaq (1996) ad says: "Over the years, a lot of people have talked about the coming of the information superhighway. The fact of the matter is, it's not coming. It's here. It's called the Internet". It appears that we will not be on the superhighway without the net! The federal government wants to place the net in all schools. President Clinton promised in his 1996 State of the Nation address that he would hook up every school in the country. Recently he and Vice President Gore made newspaper headlines in their endorsement of Netday (Clinton, April 20,1997). Netday is a day in which volunteers from computer industries hook up local schools to the Net in states like California, Georgia, and several others, including Massachusetts. Funding has come from such corporations as Apple, Netscape, Sun Microsystems, US Robotics, Netcom, Cisco Systems, and Spyglass. This paper is a look at the group that sponsored the Netday in Massachusetts, held in October, 1996, and April, 1997. The sponsor, MassNetworks, is an industry partnership with public education. For the sake of this discussionwe will argue that MassNetworks is a public relations activity from the computer industry. It is not uncommon for corporations to sponsor community/business links to promote good will with the community and also provide an environment in which the product of the company has greater acceptability. For example, the Bankers Association conducts workshops in schools on check-writing and budgeting with the goal of building future customers. This is simply good public relations practice. This paper will take a critical look at such public relations practice from the high tech industry, especially the promotion of the Internet to schools through Netday. The critical theory to examine the campaign is cultural studies, defined as a way to study culture to understand the sources of power and influence represented especially through images in the media. There has been some criticism of hooking-up of schools to the net. One newspaper critic (McCarthy, 1996) says schools with dedicated teachers would help children more than schools dedicated to computers. The luddite response to new technology is a familiar one in the study of culture. Though we may not literally smash new technology, there must be some need for a critical voice protesting the latest technology. For example, in the growth of the newspaper industry in the 19th century we were warned of the decay in morals that a daily press would spread to the masses. A similar outcry came with movies, radio, TV, and cable. What we learn from history is the need to listen to that voice. This paper provides a critical voice of the latest in computer technology by questioning the values of one public relations campaign. The research problem here is to explore the ideology of a corporate sponsored, non-profit organization in a democratic society. How does the high-tech industry encode its ideas and values within the culture? As we will see, one way is through the promotion of Netday. The goal of this paper is to examine how ideas about technology are represented in the culture. We will also see how the media assume certain themes about the Net as important. Synder (1990, p. 191) says that studies of technology transfer should examine all the stakeholders: the governments and militaries; the research institutions; the manufacturers and owners of the rights to the technology and replacement parts; software developers and promoters; the transfer agents, communication media, organizations, and interorganizational linkages; and individual, public, and business users. This project will examine the technology promoters. Wilcox, Ault, and Agee (1996) point out that product promotion is an important form of public relations support for marketing. The major research question is what is the relationship between public relations strategy and the production of values in the culture which, in this case, is the value of the Internet. As a planned communication form, a public relations tool can be a press release, a public service announcement, a brochure, or a business/community partnership. That strategy is not just a way to get information out to any audience, but also a way to code values and an ideology for the culture. For example, cultural studies writers who come from mainly the fields of literature and history would say that those in power control the cultural symbols and thereby the dreams of a culture. Through such symbols we understand ourselves and our place in the world. We used to learn who we are and where we are going through the stories of the community told and retold around the campfire. Now communal learning comes from the images of the media. Media advertisers like Disney and McDonald's not only sell entertainment and food, they also sell quick versions of fun and food. They tell us that to be an American is to enjoy fast food and the packaged entertainment of a place like Disneyworld. The minor research question is to explore how the media often set the news agenda. from public relations sources. Davis Salisbury (Talk, 1997) says the central doctrine of public relations is molding news and public opinion to match a marketing strategy. Any kind of public relations activity is a way of selling the company's product. Unfortunately, the person reading the story in the paper often does not know that the source of the story is a press release which is basically the value system of the company. A press release is the most ordinary of public relations tools. For example, today all TV news facilities use video news releases which are packaged stories produced by the public relations staff of a company like the pharmaceutical industry extolling the benefits of a new drug. The viewer then thinks that the piece on TV's nightly news came from the local news team. It is important to understand the ways in which corporate America inserts itself in news and entertainment so that the consumer can make an informed decision on the value of the product or service. This paper will illustrate how public relations activity becomes both local and national news, extolling the value of a company's product. This is a significant problem to explore because the public does not know that much in the daily press is generated by public relations. There is growing controversy about the role of computer technology, like the Internet, in the schools. Gelernter (1996) says "Virtually everything the Internet is selling, our children already have too much of and are choking on. The Web is a wonderful source of raw data. But our children are barely able to handle the data they already have--the databases and computer CDs and videotapes at many public libraries, the newspapers they don't read, the 24-hour news channels and c-spans they don't watch, the old-fashioned books they ignore." Ehrenreich (1995) says that journalism is fast becoming a branch of public relations. She says that newspaper writers are joining pr firms as newspaper jobs dwindle. With that expertise comes an ease at getting placement in the press. Meanwhile, the reader may not know that the story has been generated by the public relations staff to get favorable coverage for its client. The high tech industry, while interested in getting favorable coverage, also wants to create a climate in which there will be more acceptance of its products. This study is feasible for a number of reasons. This will be a case study of Massnetworks, the community/business partnership, through examining its own promotional materials which include a fact sheet, sources of funding. media coverage, and an organizational history. All of this material is available on the Internet. II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE A. Historical background 1. Public relations has traditionally used product-sponsored non-profit organizations as a way to make its product or service more acceptable in the public arena. This is an acceptable practice in the public relations industry. For example. the Dairy Association is currently running a campaign for milk that includes images of celebrities with milk on their upper lip. This campaign has appeared in many consumer magazines. The objective is to promote a positive image of milk. The hard liquor industry has traditionally used public relations to make its product more acceptable. There is some controversy over whether it is appropriate for this industry to use advertising while some elements in the industry want to start targeting TV, radio, and print audiences with ads. (End, 1997). A new campaign, the Citizens for a Sound Economy, promises to spread its message that excessive EPA regulations kill businesses and stifle economic growth. This pro-Big Business group has a $5 million budget for its campaign (Business, 1997). Leading companies often turn to their trade associations for lobbying (1994). One example is the troubled Tobacco Institute, the public relations vehicle for the tobacco industry. There is a new kind of group as a public relations strategy called the 'consumer- related group' or the 'people's group'. Though it may appear to be a blend of a public interest group and the trade association, as a corporate-sponsored group its allegiance is to the corporation. In creating a public relations plan for a client it is not unusual to recommend a group to be the spokesperson for the idea. Since it is such a common practice, we can assume that it works quite effectively. The terms "Citizens for", "Concerned Citizens", "Partnership", "People for" are often in the title of the group. The consumer may be unaware that this group was generated as part of the public relations strategy of the company, industry, or trade association. 2. The history of the relationship between technology and culture as one of both cultural change and domination is well documented. A communication technology is never simply a tool, but always a form of supporting one way to do something over another. The path that a technology takes is usually driven by commercial interests, and subsequently the culture accepts a new form of praxis. A few examples will help illustrate this. In 1874 the format for the typewriter was set by Remington. Other typewriters adapted it as well including Underwood, Remington's chief rival. That is the keyboard we use today. Radio was proposed in the early 1920's as free of any connection with the marketplace. Yet, within a short time pitching products over the air made radio a hit. In the 1940's TV became analog because the technology had to be available to as many homes as possible and that just happened to be the form the networks were producing. Today we are being forced to convert to digital and the US TV industry is in the shakes. The presence of cable was going to insure more public access and community involvement. Though that has happened to some degree, cable now provides more commercial channels than we can possibly watch. The Internet has been hailed as the greatest technology of modern time. Yet, critics argue that the net is fast becoming the virtual peddler (Doheny-Farina, 1996, p.83). What we see is that a communication technology changes culture in ways that support those parties who have most to gain financially from that technology. The rest of us simply accept the technology as a new 'way' to communicate faster and more efficiently. B. Cultural Theory Over the generations there have been several important social critics of the role of technology in the development of culture. They all take a cultural studies approach insofar as they point out the voices that are not heard when a new technology comes on board. They offer a critical voice that needs to be heard as we inaugurate a wide-scale use of the Internet in the schools. Mueller (1970, p. 385) said that his experience has been that a deeper understanding of a technological society gives better reasons for fear of life in it. He wondered about the purposes of the few who controlled the communication technology of the country. Innis (1972, p. 166) points out that new communication technologies like the printing press and electronic media developed monopolies of knowledge and even nationalism. Those who control the technology have a way to control the flow of ideas. Ong (1982) sees the lessening of the oral tradition with the insertion of electronic media, especially one-way communication forms. Postman (1993) argues that the world has never before been confronted with information glut and has hardly had time to reflect on its consequences. Cable can give us over 150 channels and the net will now give us almost infinite bits of information. For what? Postman says that the culture surrenders to technology and we therefore live in a state of technopoly where culture is shaped by technology. These critics challenge us to look at what the history of new technology forms in communication have done to the culture. They ask us to place them within the context of our larger human needs and social values. C. Current Literature 1. An examination of public relations practice has traditionally relied on a social science model of communication research. This means that the goal is to see how one can make a campaign more effective. Public relations research, however, needs more research that takes a critical theory approach which would be concerned about the imposition of values and ideology through the representation of one voice. That is the role of cultural studies in the history of the study of literature as well as media. Andersen (1995) says that journalism is being replaced by media marketing techniques that target the American public with messages intended to persuade, not to inform. The same marketing machine behind product advertising now drives much of nonfiction reporting. If public relations depends on the media to get its message out, we must open up to question the practices of that process. That is the role of critical theory applied to public relations practice. Goldman (1992) says that ads reframe and position our meaningful relations and discourses to accommodate the meaning of their corporate interests. He sees ads as not simply ads but ways to frame a meaning for us. One could apply his thought to promotional material like any public relations text and look at that in terms of how it defines self and one's place in society. Baker (1996, p. 103) calls for an attribution for any promotional material that appears in the press, just as an Associated Press (AP) story is tagged. He calls press releases pure advertising simply because their purpose is to promote a product or service. He says an advertiser should be barred from intentional use of its economic resources to influence nonadvertising content unless the advertiser is identified to the public in a manner that suggests its influence. 2. Two recent studies in technology and culture will serve as the updated literature review. Each of these works shows how a critical view of any promotional campaign for a technology needs to be open to question. Fisher (1996) traces the history of television which is filled with intrigue on the part of the owners of the technology. In 1939 RCA conducted the first broadcast in the USA and wanted the FCC to decide in their favor on the kind of TV receiver to be built and sold in this country. More recently, Fisher argues that the alliance set by the government in May 1993 to recommend how to deal with digital TV in the US is just a group of entrepreneurs trying to peddle their own system. Sarnoff's words at the first TV broadcast in 1939 might well be directed today to the importance of the Internet. Back then he said: "It is with a feeling of humbleness that I come to this moment of announcing the birth in this country of a new art so important in its implications that it is bound to affect all society. It is an art which shines like a torch of hope in a troubled world. It is a creative force which we must learn to utilize for the benefit of all mankind." (Fisher, p.278) The implications of a new technology for the culture are not understood simply because it is a new technology, and yet it is often called a beacon of hope. The same could be said of the Internet today. Though the system has been around for a couple of decades, it is new to the majority of people in this country. The role of the net is uncertain for Doheny-Farina (1996, p. 37) in his new book. He says, "Unfortunately, communities across the nation are being undermined and destroyed by a variety of forces. Global computer networks like the Internet represent a step in the continual virtualization of human relations. The hope that the incredible powers of global computer networks can create new virtual communities, more useful and healthier than the old geographic ones, is thus misplaced. The net seduces us and further removes us from our localities--unless we take charge of it with specific, community- based, local agendas." In his critical look at the net he wants to make sure that students have real-time interactions with teachers and peers and not merely access to displays of information. He wants the net to connect the student to his/her local community in order to enable more local involvement. He asks us to bring doubt to every claim about the net, but be committed to moving forward with it. III. METHODOLOGY This project seeks to use public relations critical theory to examine an actual case of public relations practice. The form of critical theory is called cultural studies. Cultural studies requires us to identify the operation of specific practices in a culture, of how they continuously reinscribe the line between legitimate and popular culture, and of what they accomplish in specific contexts. At the same time, Nelson, Treichler, and Grossberg (1992) suggest that cultural studies must constantly interrogate its own connection to contemporary relations of power. In terms of the promotion to wire schools, one could say that we need to see how that idea becomes important to the culture: what legitimates it; what gives that idea its power over other ideas which may or may not conflict with it. If people think a certain way in the culture, it is because the cultural symbols represent the idea to them. Who are the sources behind that way of thinking? Such are the important questions of cultural studies as a critical theory applied to this public relations case. The promotion of Internet technology in the schools is a way to promote being, thinking, and acting as well. It is not simply a public relations campaign. The major question here is: How one corporate-sponsored public relations group called Massnetworks proposes an idea that it sees as valuable for the society but does not open dialog and argument about that idea in the community? A minor question is: How did the corporate take-over of the wiring of schools in Massachusetts come about? To research these questions one major resource will be archival material. Webb, Campbell, Schwartz, and Sechrest (1972, p. 87) say that archival records offer a large mass of pertinent data for many substantive areas of social science research. They are cheap to obtain, easy to sample, and the population restrictions associated with them are often knowable and controllable through data transformation and the construction of indices. Massnetworks has provided much of the material itself. Therefore,we will use primarily this material plus press coverage of Netday. Public relations critical research along the lines of a cultural studies approach relies also on an examination of the promotional text. Hirston-Shea and Benoit (1996) examined a brochure produced by the Tobacco Institute as a response to the ridicule the tobacco industry received in several Doonesbury cartoons. It was not just a brochure, but a rhetorical act to influence stakeholders. This project will look at the larger question of how promotion of the Internet fits into the Massachusetts school system. This is the need to give an economic and political focus to a text that we examine in cultural studies research. Bird (1997) argues that it is common for cultural studies researchers to use only the text and theoretical readings to examine it. The focus here will be the text, the promotional material from Massnetworks, but in the light of the cultural environment. This method might also be called an historical/critical approach. We will examine the origin of the organization, its promotional material, and the press coverage of its major media event, Netday. The following are the major resources: archival material, interviews, secondary material, and media clippings. We will then offer a critique of that material. Webb et al. (1972, p.54) say there are two major sources of bias in archival records: selective deposit and selective survival. The material we will use is readily available and we can easily look at all of it to make an argument. Cultural studies research often uses a method called textual analysis. This method suggests examining the words and images of the text,e.g. the campaign material, in the light of the culture in which it is produced. The meaning of the words and pictures are therefore discerned in relation to the economic and political environment in which they are represented. IV. DISCUSSION The discussion follows in this order: origin of the group called MassNetworks, funding for the group, Netday, and media coverage of the day. Finally, there will be an analysis of the material. 1. MassNetworks The public relations printed material from the MassNetworks Education Partnership (1997a) says it is a volunteer, non-partisan organization of people from business, government, and education, working together to bring the Internet into Massachusetts' schools. MassNetworks began in 1996 The sources of funding for the group are as follows: Quantum $100,000 Sun Microsystems $50,000 NYNEX $25,000 AT&T $25,000 DEC $25,000 BankBoston $22,500 Massachusetts Technology Collaborative $10,000 IDX $7,500 Wang $5,000 The Board of Directors has 30 members: 80% are high tech executives and 20% are educators. The mission of MassNetworks is to build the electronic infrastructure for the education system that will give teachers the tools and students the skills needed for success in the 21st century. The business people working with MassNetworks give some combination of the following four reasons for participation: 1) They believe that it is the right thing to do, a way to give back to their community. 2) Their employees have made it clear that they want the firm to be involved. 3) They know that their firms will eventually benefit from the improvement of the education system and the increased availability of a properly trained labor force. 4) They believe that the education market will soon be an important part of their business and they want to come in on the ground floor as helpful partners. MassNetworks sponsored Netday, which was held on October 26, 1996 and on April 5, 1997. On both days volunteers from the computer industry helped to wire public schools throughout the state. This type of program has also been held in other states around the country. There are 2,536 public schools in the state. MassNetworks reports (1997b) that about 700 or 27% are now wired for the Net. 2. Discourse of the Public Relations Material What follows is a discussion on how this public relations material produces its meaning about technology in the culture. Textual analysis is a method to look at the words and images of the campaign in the light of the culture in which they are produced. There are several key terms in the material that need to be discussed. First, business is leading the way. MassNetworks is a group started and promoted by the corporate sector. Second, the technology of the super-highway is the focus which is a vision that the state and our schools need to buy into to stay competitive. Third, the nation's future will be better because of the growth of the computer technology industry which will provide job opportunities and a stronger economy. Fourth, education is following the lead of the business community. Education can learn what to do from business. Fifth, a collaborative union or partnership between the business community and the education community is a benefit to both. The words of the campaign material need to be open to debate and dialog because the ideology they present is the corporate voice, and not necessarily the only voice about the future of education. Business leads the way to greater profits, but not necessarily to the benefit of the social order. Accepting the importance of high tech, especially the Internet, means buying into a technology that is not neutral , or just another way to communicate, but an investment in the importance of technology as both an industry and a way of thinking about self, work, and the social order. The future they propose will be improved by bringing the Internet into the classroom. They say we will prepare our students to assume their role in the 21st century through the introduction of Internet technology. Education is dependent on the use of high tech, especially the Internet. The collaboration is good for both entities, corporate high tech and education. What educators give to the high tech professionals for their expertise are dollars to purchase goods and services from them. 3. New Technology Index To illustrate the need to look at the Internet in terms of how new technology has taken a commercial route rather than becoming a source of community-building, we need only look at the history of the TV and cable industries. Below is a table called the New Technology Index in which three industries are profiled: TV, cable, and the Internet. TV and cable have following a similar path in becoming part of popular culture. Internet seems to be taking the same journey. The early proponents of all three, as Sarnoff predicted for TV, describe a vision of greater community and a smaller globe simply because of the new technology. Yet, we know that in the case of TV and cable that vision was put on the back burner so that commercial interests could support the growth of the technology. The ownership of TV and the cable industry is private, whereas the Internet is both private and public. Internet needs a provider which in the majority of cases is a private company. Someone always has to pay for providing that service. TV and cable went the route of selling commercial time to support the technology. It appears that the Internet is on the same path. The government has little part in the direction of Internet whereas the FCC obligated TV and cable to a minimum public response. For example, the number of commercials on children's Saturday morning TV was limited because otherwise the broadcast industry would show a constant flow of commercials of cereals and toys. The final question in the Index is the technology's benefit to the schools. TV and cable have little benefit since they are mainly entertainment. There are however exceptions like some Public TV programming, learning channels on cable, and limited distance learning using cable. The benefit of the Internet to the schools is still in question because the industry is evolving. The signs of that evolution however are moving along commercial lines which makes one doubt that the Internet will be much different from both TV and cable in benefiting education. Table: New Technology Index TV Cable Internet (1931) (1971) (1997) 1. GRAND Common Good Common Good Common Good VISION 2. OWNERSHIP RCA, networks Cable industry Public and private 3. ROLE OF Government supported Government supported No government control GOVERNMENT industry; FCC industry; FCC 4. PROVIDER TV networks by selling Cable company or phone Private companies; some advertising time company; mainly government sources, but financed by advertising somebody always pays. and subscription Limited Freenet 5. CUSTOMER Viewer Cable subscriber; viewer Subscriber can purchase dish 6. BENEFIT TO None because market- Very little because it is Limited distance learning. SCHOOLS driven, except public TV 95% commercial, except Commercial use dominates. for a few educational/ Fast becoming special interest channels. Virtual Peddler. Future in question??? 4. Analysis The focus here is the cultural context in which the public relations campaign is produced. First, we live in a culture that is market-driven. The hot communication technology now appears to be the Internet. One valuable market is the education community but it is the corporate initiative that is driving the Internet insertion into the schools, as one Georgia paper claimed after Georgia's Netday (Loupe, 1996). Remember that one goal of MassNetworks is to sell products to the schools. Second, educators seem to be playing a minor role in this partnership. The majority of the MassNetworks board are high tech executives. There are many teachers who are not even sure about computers, much less the Internet. How will this technology play in the schools? Third, the one voice seems to be that technology will launch our schools into the 21st century. This discourse is that of a non-profit group whose funding comes from the computer industry. Fourth, the New Technology Index above shows us the history with other communication technologies. The ones who profit from it are the business ventures. Each of the technologies promised a vision of community and a more informed society. With both TV and cable we have become a society of consumers, not necessarily a society of more learned and caring individuals. The campaign from MassNetworks is promoted in a culture that needs to hear other voices about technology and education. We do not need simply to accept the messages of the campaign, especially because of our history with other important communication technologies. TV and cable made promises that were not fulfilled because the marketplace drove them in a different direction. One can see that in the Internet today. Every day more businesses are going on the Internet. One computer executive (Conrades, 1997) said in a recent speech, "Business use of the Internet is on fire. The World Wide Web is expanding at an incredible rate-even faster than the PC did a decade ago. In fact, the Net is now the fastest growing technology in economic history, attracting financial and intellectual capital at an unrelenting pace. The number of Internet hosts is growing at triple-digit rates in countries across Europe, Asia, and Latin America." As the corporate sector assumes leadership on the Net, the education community must come to terms with its relationship to the Net. Who will lead? Who will follow? Whose benefit will result in the process? Who will speak for the education community? These are important questions to ask as we confront public relations strategies like Netday that originate in a partnership with the computer industry. V. CONCLUSION The research problem here was to critique the public relations discourse of a corporate-sponsored partnership with education. The goal was to examine how ideas about technology are spread in the culture. We also wanted to see how the media take certain themes as important, and, in this case, coverage about the public relations event called Netday. We began with a discussion of partnerships between business and the non-profit sector as a common public relations strategy. The case at hand is the partnership called MassNetworks Education Partnership whose goal is to win wider acceptance of the Net. The intent was to examine the public relations campaign from a cultural studies perspective. Cultural studies is a way to look at media in order to discern the voices that are not heard, and to point out the control and dominance of one voice over others. This is a critical theory through which one might also look at public relations practice. To explore the campaign we examined the promotional materials from the organization as well as the media coverage of Netday. The text of the campaign was discussed in the light of a wider economic and political context. In this case, that meant looking at a history of social criticism of technology. Also, through the New Technology Index we saw how the history of both TV and cable developed along commercial lines which also seems to be the case with the Internet. Media coverage of Netday produces or encodes the importance of the net for the 2lst century, especially for education. Yet, as we have shown, this is the voice of the computer industry that the media has assumed thus becoming almost a spokesperson for the industry. Thereby the high-tech industry shows its persuasive and economic power to spread its ideas and values into the culture. A question that we raised here was where are the silent voices on the social value of the Net. They will not to be heard from MassNetworks whose board of directors and funding come from the computer industry. Yet, as a democracy we need a dissenting voice. If we hear only the voice of the computer industry, we are set to repeat the story of TV and cable. The promise of these technologies was hope for greater human compassion and a closer community. It didn't happen. Corporations grew around the industry, producing, marketing, and selling not only programming, but an endless stream of consumer goods. Understanding that history of communication technology, we might see ourselves at a crossroads with the Internet. Will we let the commercial interests of the computer industry dictate the direction of the Net? Or will we insist that the Net provide the means to build a stronger local community? That is up to us. In an effort to maintain national identity France has recently voiced opposition to the Internet. We will hear from others. Let them speak. This paper achieved what it set out to do: to examine critically the ideology of a public relations campaign for the Internet. What is left now is to track the public relations efforts for the dissenting voices about the new technology. Who will say it? Where will we hear it or read it? It is out there. We need to support it so that we can facilitate a dialog about the Net technology and not simply accept the voice of the computer industry as the only voice. REFERENCES Andersen, R. (1995) Consumer culture and TV programming. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Baker, C. E. (1996) Advertising and a democratic process. Princton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Bird, E. (March 31, 1997) Cultural Studies and TV. An email message to a cultural studies interest group. Business group plans $5M drive to counter EPA on environment. (February, 1997) O'Dwyer's Report . p. 1. Clinton, Gore push Internet link with schools.(April 20, 1997) Boston Globe Compaq Ad (1996) "Soon there will be two kinds of companies." Promotional flyer. Conrades, G. (March 11, 1997) The Internet: Where do we go from here? A speech given at the Network Outlook Conference, hosted by Technologic Partners in San Francisco. Doheny-Farina, S. (1996) Wired Neighborhood. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. Ehrenreich, B ( December 4, 1995) Media Matters. The Nation. p. 698. End of voluntary ban on TV liquor ads worries PR firms. (March, 1997) O'Dwyer's Report . p. 1. Fisher, D. E. and Fisher, M. J. (1996) Tube: The invention of television. Washington, DC: Counterpoint. Gelernter, D. (November 29, 1996) Why the Internet should not be an academic topic. Letters to the Editor. The Chronicle of Higher Education, p. B7. Goldman, R. (1992) Reading ads socially. London: Routledge. Hirston-Shea, D. and Benoit, W. L. (November, 1996) Doonesbury versus the Tobacco Industy: The Smoke Starters Coupon. McDonald, . A Presentation made at the annual meeting of the Speech Communication Association. San Diego. Innis, H. A. (1972) Empire and Communications. Toronto: Univeristy of Toronto Press. Leading companies turn to trade associations for lobbying. (Aug/Sep, 1994) Public Relations Journal, V. 50, p. 13. Loupe, D. (October 25, 1996) Companies pitch in to put schools online. Atlanta Constitution. Massnetworks Partnership -a- (March, 1997) Promotional material available on the Internet Massnetworks Partnership -b- (April 2, 1997) Interview with David Mordecai, Project Director. McCarthy, C (September 10, 1996) Computers don't make school user-friendly,Washington Post, Sec. C, p. 13, Col. 4. Mueller, H. J. (1970) The Children of Frankenstein: A Primer on modern technology and Human values. Bloomington and London: Indiana University Press. Nelson, C., Treichler, P. A. and Grossberg, L., (1992) Cultural Studies: An Introduction. In Cultural Studies. Edited by Lawrence Grosberg, Paula A. Treichler, and Cary Nelson. New York: Routledge. Ong, W. J.(1982) Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London and New York: Methuen. Postman, N.(1993) Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Vintage Books. Snyder, L. B. (1996) Technology Transfer trhough cautious eyes Journal of Commmunication, Summer, 46 (3). Talk from the Top: 1987 was a very good year for Julie Davis Salisbury (April,1997) Public Relations Tactics, p. 30 and 31. Webb, E. J., Campbell, D. T., Schwartz, R. D., and Sechrest, L. (1972) Unobtrusive measures: Nonreactive research in the social sciences. Chicago: Rand McNally. Wilcox, D. L., Ault, P. H., and Agee, W. K.(1995) Public Relations Strategies and Tactics. Fourth Edition. New York: Harper Collins. 1