Martha Lane-Fox: No broadband, no citizenship

Okay

"I don't think you can be a proper citizen in our society in the future if you're not online,"

I'm pretty sure she meant that it would be very hard to get-by, not that you should be denied any rights. Dumb people are blowing this quote all out of proportion.

Lots of surprising goodness about!

"She was appearing on a surprisingly good BBC Radio 4 investigation into internet refuseniks."

And Andrew's review was also surprisingly good!

I agree...

I'm also an internet refusenik and refuse to go anywhere near the thing.

hey, wait a minute...

MLF? She's bonkers

Take my aged mother, aged 87. She uses the phone and even a mobile and if she wants anything from the internet, she uses her free bus pass and goes to the local Library.

She has no need to have her own connection despite the almost weekly calls from India extolling the virtues of Virgin Media and its 50Mb connection speed. Good luck chums. She is miles away from the nearest cable network. Besides, I would get higher speeds with Mobile Broadband than wired at her house anyway.

Oh please

Andrew, DO fuck off, there's a good chap. You're boring.

Sorry Luv (in my best patronising voice)

but 2012 and gonna get 100%

My parent do not have internet.

They don't see a need for internet, being reitired, they really don't care if someone has had a shit at 4:14pm, followed by Latte with Natasha and Brian

They hate sport....

so you self obsessed moron, how are you going to get them to part with £20 a month?

Why can't these arseholes just accept that people can live without it, the internet is not the be all and end all of life, there are plently of people that don't have a TV in the house.

OMG, how like do they survive?

Once again...

Once again the media (in this case The Register) make a story where there isn't one. A person, basically unrelated to the government says "it's going to be hard in the future to get by without using the Internet", a sentiment that the vast majority of us would agree with and it somehow turns into a slating of the current government. A good example of why I tend to avoid Andrew's stories.

Olympics

I couldn't give a bloody monkeys about the Olympics personally.

I think some people just can't be bothered and just get by anyway. For instance, my Grandma is 93, she's got no interest in the internet, sure she does go over to my Uncle's house and occasonally gets to talk to her grandkids who are abroad but she doesn't see the need to get herself online. Heck she doesn't even have a Freeview box!

WTF is the government thinking anyway, I mean really what does Martha Lane-Fox know about the internet, sure she setup a .com company and made millions, but so did a few others. It's like using Bill Gates for advice because he setup Microsoft.

I'd say someone like Tim Berners-Lee would be better suited to the job.

Rob

Hats off

for the use of 'proles' :)

Nice one Andrew!

I don't always agree with your pieces but I do this one, internet access won't reach everyone until all the old codgers die out.

Government may see us all as their customers but they'd do well to realise that they are mere servants, whose position exists at the will of the people (oh if only it worked like that!). Businesses may decide that it's uneconomical to serve some small percentage of clients (witness Linux support from lots of companies, for example) however governments should not have this luxury.

In a way I'm glad this shower is likely to get kicked out shortly, but I'm rather afraid that we might end up with something even worse. Ho hum what to do.

Get real ...

MLF said: "I don't think you can be a proper citizen in our society in the future if you're not online,"

<rant>

Pardon me, but ... WHAT?

MLF, "Champion for digital inclusion". What the fuck does that *even mean*?

She's a Sloany, hustling rube with no technical or social qualifications whatsoever. She's a compete nobody. She set up a bucket shop on the Internet. Ages ago. Big wooo. So why is anyone even bothering to solicit her opinion now, today, in 2009?

This get rich quick merchant/visionary and her ridiculous company were overrated and over-hyped fifteen years ago (good luck to her) and after two decades of total obscurity she gets assigned, unelected and without reference to anyone else who may be better qualified, to be some kind of "spokesperson" for citizenry and the web.

She and her ilk are a symptom of what's wrong with politics and society in general, and as such she has no credibility, credence or authority to lecture or advise anyone about anything.

Christ ... what a joke.

</rant>

Oh, I know she's also done a lot of good work for charity and that's fine. I'm not criticising her for that.

Martha Lane-Fox

"The alternative is that the "cost base" of Government "interacting offline" with "its customers" is unaffordable, a depressing prospect MILF said."

Poor Martha. Is she a depressing prospect MILF? I wonder if her middle name is Ingrid. She must use the "Lane" to reduce the purile amusement value her name would otherwise provide, but a middle name beginning with "I" would just undo all her hard work.

The real question is what the internet refuseniks make of the incessant price comparison adverts everywhere. Are they as bored with them as the rest of us? Is there ANYONE who doesn't know they COULD save money on their car insurance? Oh wait, it's Friday. I don't care :)

Jeezo!

After reading some of the comments in 'ere, I'm now not surprised that Andy boy decides to leave the "comments enabled" box unchecked on most of his articles!

Paris because she never leaves her box unchecked.

I DREAM OF A FUTURE OFFLINE

I dream of a future where I never need to go online.

I only go online for one reason - to work & make money. I'd much rather be sitting on a boat in the Carbiean fishing for my supper and supping an ice cold beer.

As per an earlier news item...

...internet usage and mobile technology dehumanizes us and has taken away our community spirit. We have less and less face to face contact with our neighbours and youngsters are developing improper people skills as everything they do is online with strangers.

Well that's what the vicar says.

Sigh

Another typical Orlowski - nearly very good, but with a silly throwaway comment. Sorting recycling is 'pointless'? So, it'd be a _good_ thing all around if we all just stuck easily-and-usefully-recyclable things like paper, glass and organic food matter in the landfill with the stuff that it's impossible or pointless to recycle? *why*? Not everything supported by tree-huggers is a bad idea just because they happen to like it, Andrew.

@Tom 15

Ok Tom 15 - it seems you are the FAIL on this occasion.

If you bothered to read the news you would have realised that back in June this year the government announced the appointment of Martha Lane Fox as Britain's "Digital Inclusion Champion". So she is talking about whether people are online at the request of the government and you claim that she is "basically unrelated to the government". It is people like you, who are clearly Brown apologists, who try to create lies about truthful reporting which paints Gordon Clown's muppet show in a bad light, who portray everything that is wrong with Britain.

I suppose you are going to vote for Gordon Clown and his Muppet Show come the next election, despite the overwhelming evidence that he has done his utmost to destroy the country.

Keep up the good work Andrew, and I was particularly impressed with the use of the word "Prole".

She is related to the government.

@Tom 15 She is unrelated to the governement othe than the fact that they employ her. Yes, that's right our taxes pay for her to the 'digital inclusion champion' she was appointed on the 17th July.

"I don't think you can be a proper citizen in our society in the future if you're not online,"

And it doesn't really matter a whole lot if you *are* online because using the internet to contact our allegely democratic Government just gives them another opportunity to ignore us...

Is that so?

If it's going to be hard getting by without the Internet in the future, then the "problem" is going to solve itself when such time comes and there's no need to make documentaries about these people as if a tribe that still lives in the stone age has just been discovered. All that the society needs to do about them is make sure that all technical requirements are met so that these people will be able to get a connection when they feel the need to do so.

And the owner of an Internet company trying to persuade people that they're second grade citizens (in whatever sense meant) if they are not on line is nothing to be surprised by or given any real significance to. It's like all the other commercials that are telling us that we'll be better, smarter, more attractive (worse, dumber, more unappealing) then the rest if we (don't) use their shampoo, wear their shoes or chew their gum.

Why 100%?

Why is the government so keen to promote the use of the Internet? What's the benefit of getting 100% of the population using the Internet?

Because it's cheaper for the government to deliver services *only* via the Internet. They can save vast amounts of money (already committed in "efficiency savings" in the Budget, so there's no escape) by getting rid of front-line staff. If you can't fill in the on-line forms, that's your problem - tough! Go round to your local Citizens Advice Bureau and ask them to help, because central and local government have closed all their face-to-face offices. This is why the Treasury gave the CAB service £20Mill in 2002 - that's how long "they" have been planning this......

I think the point is missed

Again, yet again, the threat of coercion is being raised to ensure that the nice plebs get into line and do what they're told. All in the name of inclusion, integration and a more equal, socially just country.

Why does everything have to be a war on something?

PS keep up the good work Andrew. Some of your articles have been excellent in the last while.

Re: "I don't think you can be a proper citizen in our society in the future if you're not online,"

Graham said: "And it doesn't really matter a whole lot if you *are* online because using the internet to contact our allegely democratic Government just gives them another opportunity to ignore us..."

Being on line also gives our guvvermint another opportunity to fill a database from monitoring our activities!

But there is hope! If I become a refusenik, does that mean that they will throw me out?

M i L F ??

/Please/ stop calling her MLF; I keep reading it as MILF and I throw up a little into my mouth...

Tax!!

ISTR that once you post your tax online you can't go back to the paper version. A bit tough if you ain't got no internet. I think thats what they mean by citizenship.

I've -never- used the internet...

...and I don't intend to start now!

good article

Agree with the recycling thing, it's stupid. There was a time, children, when milk came in bottles. When you had drunk the milk, rather than smashing the bottle at a bottle bank and it then being chucked into a hole in the ground because there's no market for broken glass, the bottle was returned to the dairy, who washed it and used it to put milk in. That was recycling. What happens today is pissing in the wind. I could give lots of similar examples.

As for the shite about the internet, this smells like the govts rights and responsibilities thing; somehow we all owe the govt a favour. Try this: substitute supermarket for govt and customer for citizen. I pay my supermarket to supply with food etc. I don't have to account to them for any choices I make, they supply goods and services, I pay them. Why oh why does the govt think they're different? I pay them for goods and services which they supply: I'm the master in the relationship. Except they think they're the master and I've got to do it their way.

So we get all this stuff about "coercion is a dimension" and how we've got to do everything on the internet because it's all too expensive otherwise. The "The alternative is that the "cost base" of Government "interacting offline" with "its customers" is unaffordable, a depressing prospect" comment is exactly where it's at. Sod the service, we're cutting costs. Like this helps me? Makes me richer? Again I'm old enough to remember the time when BT and the gas and electricity people had shops in the main towns of our fair land: when it all went pear shaped, you went to the shop and they (well not always) sorted it out. Very often there and then. Very often the people in these shops knew more about the workings of the company than the board of directors, because they'd been there longer. Compare and contrast with the monkeys in the call centre giving random answers until the customer just gives up. (T-Mobile, I'm looking at you)

As a small service to future generations, I now refuse to use call centres and internet interfaces to banks, utilities, central and local govt. I pay by cash or cheque, don't use chip and pin (well ok, I've got _a_ card with a pin), don't do atms and don't do direct debits, ever. If at all possible I avoid all contractual arrangements with large companies as they aren't worth the paper they're written on: every contract I've ever had has been torn up and replaced unilaterally by MegaCorp, with no effective come back. In the event of some cock up, don't get on the phone or the internet to the helpline because they're fucking useless (first direct used to be ok, but they've hired a load of monkeys now); instead, write a reasoned letter to the legal department of MegaCorp (the internet is good for finding the address for service), ignore the computer generated bullshit they spew at you and eventually you'll get a substantive reply, very often in your favour.

None of this is much more labour intensive than spending hours on the phone talking to idiots. It also cuts out the majority of the aggravation of dealing with large organisations by eliminating it's causes.

Grrr!

I'd listened to the show on iPlayer this afternoon and it took me several hours to calm down about the idea of coercing people to use the internet - or indeed anything else....

Honestly, if it does come to that, I will be giving serious consideration to stopping using the internet just to spite the fuckers!

Now I'm coming over all angsty again.......grrr.....

Appearing on the radio?

That's a neat trick.

@ windywoo

Yes, I bothered to listen too, and what she *should* have done was qualify everything she said -- VERY CAREFULLY. She FAILED to do this. Not the sort of thing someone appointed/allied to government should do. Or be seen to forget.

The Internet is no more a measure of social integration any more than a fruit-machine or a binge-drinking habit, and anyone who thinks it is of long term importance to the evolution of the human race, egality, fraternity or fairness should seriously take stock of themselves and re-evaluate their life.

@Mike Richards

The Americans have need of the internet^w telephone, but we do not. We have plenty of messenger boys.

@Greg

Heh, 100% agree with you. We can only know what she said, not what she meant - and I'd love to know what her definition of a "proper citizen" is.

Blobby Hell

First it's labour with their Orwellian databases and CCTV everywhere

Now according to MLF, to be a good citizen you need broadband, what's next? the right to be a full citizen (entitled to vote) is earned through voluntary federal service. Remember that in Heinlein's Starship Troopers, the Terran Federation is a limited democracy.

These are not the people you want to vote for (waves hand to make Jedi power work)

Makes you wonder where they are getting their ideas from, but then, wasn't Jerry Pournelle one of the architects of Reagan's SDI/Star Wars plan.

Be afraid, be very afraid...

Landfill

Perhaps the anti-recycling people would like to volunteer their gardens as landfill sites.

actually old chap

"There was a time, children, when milk came in bottles. When you had drunk the milk, rather than smashing the bottle at a bottle bank and it then being chucked into a hole in the ground because there's no market for broken glass, the bottle was returned to the dairy, who washed it and used it to put milk in. That was recycling."

At the risk of being pedantic, that wasn't recycling, it was re-using. I agree it would be nice to return to that state. Reduce, re-use, recycle, in order of preference.

Welcome to the Hotel Internet

You can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.

We will find you, we will monitor you, we will lose your data, there will be no escape.

Solyent Green anyone

Paris- Cos even she knows that internet exposure is for life not just for Winterval

Biggest threat is not ML-F at all

We should be more worried about the problems in getting face-to-face contact with Our Glorious Leader and his jack-booted minions than whether we are taking what some ZaNu Labour mouthpiece said "in context".

I need some information from the Department for Work and Pensions but I cannot seem to get the people on the telephone line to actually understand what I need - I want to sit down in front of someone and explain it until I am happy that what they give me is what I want, but unfortunately every time I ask where my local Benefits Office is, I get told to go down the Job Centre and use the phone in the corner and call them...

How the freaking hell can I goown the Job Centre and use the phone when the Job Centre is only available online (and probably outsourced to India or China, to boot?)

We need some way to remind these idiots that they are supposed to be our Representatives in the decision-making process and not our Dictatorial Overlords with a divine right to control our evey move.

Missing the point...

It is NOT about ensuring that everyone in Britian has access to the Internet - ITS THAT THOSE PEOPLE ARE NOT PAYING FOR INTERNET SERVICE!

How can they just sit there, happily ignoring the Government's and BT's "empty" purses when they have the cash in their "retirement accounts", just gagging to jump out and pay for yet another non-needed "service"? The selfishness of it all appalls me!

FOR SHAME, BLIGHTY! FOR SHAME!