Freedom and cyberspace today.

The Barlow reading, ‘A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace’ (1976) particularly intrigued me this week. As a part of the cyber-libertarian movement, the term ‘cyberspace’ was first coined within this manifesto, and has been used in mainstream culture since.

In today’s day and age, I find it hard to imagine how somebody three decades ago may have envisaged such an anarchist, idealist image of cyberspace and the internet in particular. For those who imagined such a place, the resulting cyberspace today may seem very disappointing, as although information is still shared, there is definitely censorship and capitalist ideologies in order. Also, the censorship of information is becoming more and more prevalent, as governments continue to try and control which information is available. The world today is becoming at once more private and public, with a growing concern about privacy on the internet, yet many sharing more of their personal information than ever before. Leftover organisations of the cyber-libertarian movement such as Wikileaks continue to share classified information with the world, however there is often public outcry at these actions, with people stating they have no right and would prefer not to know.

Within the text author speaks of a space that transcends the physical aspects of space and time, where there is no ruling body or government and information and knowledge is freely shared. Instead he claims a social contract will be in place. He states ‘cyberspace consists of transactions, relationships and thought itself, arranged like a standing wave in our web of communications, ours is a world that is both everywhere and nowhere, but it is not where bodies live’. This contradicts the notion of previous readings that discuss communication networks such as the internet as a metaphorical body, with wires as its nerves.

The language within the piece is strong, beginning with ‘on behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone’, and continuing even more forcefully with ‘you have no sovereignty’ and ‘no moral right to rule us’. Overall the tone of the piece is quite confronting, however I did find it very interesting to read. To me, the idealistic portrayal of an anarchist cyberspace is a bit naive to me, however I do not necessarily believe the internet should be mediated in the way it is today. Overall I find the notion of freedom of information a very contentious and controversial issue as I can see both sides of the argument.