Theories and rhetoric of the "information society"

Theories and rhetoric of the "information society"

http://www.models-research.ie/publications/art/99-1b.html
In the mid-1960s, when computing was known as data processing and the economies of the most advanced industrial nations were shifting from manufacturing to services, theorists proposed the emergence of an "information society." This "new society" idea, based on the notion that the production of knowledge was replacing industrial production, was believed to have strong social implications. Writers such as the American Daniel Bell (1973) envisaged that society would evolve towards more participatory, decentralised and democratic forms of organisation.
With the introduction of the personal computer in 1981, the concept of the "information society" received new impetus. The computer and electronics industry went through a period of rapid restructuring and global growth while it promoted the notion of a computer in every home. These developments influenced the restatement of visions about a new kind of "post-industrialism" in which societies with high levels of knowledge skills, or the capacity to develop those quickly, held competitive advantage and the capacity to transform themselves into more open and responsive societies. But while the "personal" computer is marketed and sold as a domestic durable akin to the washing machine or television, its use is still heavily concentrated in corporate and government offices, not in homes, schools or community centres.
From the early 1990s onwards, the rapid convergence of computers with private and public telecommunications networks placed a new emphasis on instant and universal access to vast banks of information and on rapid information exchange across geographic, social and cultural boundaries. The intensified commercialisation of the WorldWide Web from 1994 appeared to have given the "information society" a specific shape and form.
Among researchers and scholars, however, there is no consensus about what the "information society" is or even that it exists. For instance, Daniel Bell's theories have numerous critics (among others, Webster, 1995; Robins and Webster, 1987; Marvin, 1987; Gershuny and Miles, 1983; Schiller, 1981). In particular, Bell's claim that an "information society" exists when the "information workers" (clerks, teachers, lawyers and entertainers) outnumber the other workers is highly contentious because every occupation involves information processing of one kind or another.
Frank Webster (1995) notes that the "information society" advocates do not distinguish between quantitative and qualitative measures; they assume that qualitative increases (in information, information industries and occupations, and information flows) transform into qualitative changes in social systems. Many of these theorists have abandoned the notion that information has a semantic content. In classic "information society" terms, information is conceived of as a quantity measured in "bits." In a similar vein, Theodore Roszak has observed that: "For the information theorist, it does not matter whether we are transmitting a fact, a judgement, a shallow cliché, a deep teaching, a sublime truth, or a nasty obscenity" (quoted in Webster, 1995:25-26).
Webster's rigorous analysis of the principal authors in this field concludes that the work of theorists Anthony Giddens (1987;1985), Herbert Schiller (1996;1981), and Jürgen Habermas (1989 [1962]) stand up best to empirical scrutiny. These three writers differ in approach but all agree that the current era does not represent a break from the past based on information. Rather, the "informatisation" of life has been increasing for several centuries and recent developments are part of a historical continuity: the familiar capitalist endeavour.
Despite persuasive analyses which challenge its existence, the "information society" concept has become the focus of key social and economic policies in Ireland and the EU. Part of the difficulty in this concept is that it moulds easily to different political and economic contexts. A consultancy report for the European Commission notes that "people from opposite shades of the political spectrum ... could identify with and interpret even the same elements of the [information society] in their own manner and to their own satisfaction" (Nexus, 1995

vol.1:7).