|
I
Introduction
1. "Today's revolution in social
communications involves a fundamental reshaping of the elements by
which people comprehend the world about them, and verify and express
what they comprehend. The constant availability of images and ideas,
and their rapid transmission even from continent to continent, have
profound consequences, both positive and negative, for the
psychological, moral and social development of persons, the structure
and functioning of societies, intercultural communications, and the
perception and transmission of values, world views, ideologies, and
religious beliefs".1
The truth of these words has become
clearer than ever during the past decade. Today it takes no great
stretch of the imagination to envisage the earth as an interconnected
globe humming with electronic transmissions—a chattering planet
nestled in the provident silence of space. The ethical question is
whether this is contributing to authentic human development and
helping individuals and peoples to be true to their transcendent
destiny.
And, of course, in many ways the answer
is yes. The new media are powerful tools for education and cultural
enrichment, for commercial activity and political participation, for
intercultural dialogue and understanding; and, as we point out in the
document that accompanies this one,2 they also can serve
the cause of religion. Yet this coin has another side. Media of
communication that can be used for the good of persons and communities
can be used to exploit, manipulate, dominate, and corrupt.
2. The Internet is the latest and in
many respects most powerful in a line of media—telegraph,
telephone, radio, television—that for many people have
progressively eliminated time and space as obstacles to communication
during the last century and a half. It has enormous consequences for
individuals, nations, and the world.
In this document we wish to set out a
Catholic view of the Internet, as a starting point for the Church's
participation in dialogue with other sectors of society, especially
other religious groups, concerning the development and use of this
marvelous technological instrument. The Internet is being put to many
good uses now, with the promise of many more, but much harm also can
be done by its improper use. Which it will be, good or harm, is
largely a matter of choice—a choice to whose making the Church
brings two elements of great importance: her commitment to the dignity
of the human person and her long tradition of moral wisdom.3
3. As with other media, the person and
the community of persons are central to ethical evaluation of the
Internet. In regard to the message communicated, the process of
communicating, and structural and systemic issues in communication,
"the fundamental ethical principle is this: The human person and
the human community are the end and measure of the use of the media of
social communication; communication should be by persons to persons
for the integral development of persons".4
The common good—"the sum
total of social conditions which allow people, either as groups or as
individuals, to reach their fulfillment more fully and more
easily"5—provides a second basic principle for
ethical evaluation of social communications. It should be understood
inclusively, as the whole of those worthy purposes to which a
community's members commit themselves together and which the community
exists to realize and sustain. The good of individuals depends upon
the common good of their communities.
The virtue disposing people to protect
and promote the common good is solidarity. It is not a feeling of
"vague compassion or shallow distress" at other people's
troubles, but "a firm and persevering determination to commit
oneself to the common good; that is to say to the good of all and of
each individual, because we are all really responsible for all".6
Especially today solidarity has a clear, strong international
dimension; it is correct to speak of, and obligatory to work for, the
international common good.
4. The international common good, the
virtue of solidarity, the revolution in communications media and
information technology, and the Internet are all relevant to the
process of globalization.
To a great extent, the new technology
drives and supports globalization, creating a situation in which
"commerce and communications are no longer bound by
borders".7 This has immensely important consequences.
Globalization can increase wealth and foster development; it offers
advantages like "efficiency and increased production... greater
unity among peoples... a better service to the human family".8
But the benefits have not been evenly shared up to now. Some
individuals, commercial enterprises, and countries have grown
enormously wealthy while others have fallen behind. Whole nations have
been excluded almost entirely from the process, denied a place in the
new world taking shape. "Globalization, which has profoundly
transformed economic systems by creating unexpected possibilities of
growth, has also resulted in many people being relegated to the side
of the road: unemployment in the more developed countries and extreme
poverty in too many countries of the Southern Hemisphere continue to
hold millions of women and men back from progress and
prosperity".9
It is by no means clear that even
societies that have entered into the globalization process have done
so entirely as a matter of free, informed choice. Instead, "many
people, especially the disadvantaged, experience this as something
that has been forced upon them rather than as a process in which they
can actively participate".10
In many parts of the world,
globalization is spurring rapid, sweeping social change. This is not
just an economic process but a cultural one, with both positive and
negative aspects. "Those who are subjected to it often see
globalization as a destructive flood threatening the social norms
which had protected them and the cultural points of reference which
had given them direction in life....Changes in technology and work
relationships are moving too quickly for cultures to respond".11
5. One major consequence of the
deregulation of recent years has been a shift of power from national
states to transnational corporations. It is important that these
corporations be encouraged and helped to use their power for the good
of humanity; and this points to a need for more communication and
dialogue between them and concerned bodies like the Church.
Use of the new information technology
and the Internet needs to be informed and guided by a resolute
commitment to the practice of solidarity in the service of the common
good, within and among nations. This technology can be a means for
solving human problems, promoting the integral development of persons,
creating a world governed by justice and peace and love. Now, even
more than when the Pastoral Instruction on the Means of Social
Communications Communio et Progressio made the point more than
thirty years ago, media have the ability to make every person
everywhere "a partner in the business of the human race".12
This is an astonishing vision. The
Internet can help make it real—for individuals, groups, nations,
and the human race—only if it is used in light of clear, sound
ethical principles, especially the virtue of solidarity. To do so will
be to everyone's advantage, for "we know one thing today more
than in the past: we will never be happy and at peace without one
another, much less if some are against others".13 This
will be an expression of that spirituality of communion which implies
"the ability to see what is positive in others, to welcome it and
prize it as a gift from God," along with the ability "to
‘make room' for our brothers and sisters, bearing ‘each
other's burdens' (Gal. 6, 2) and resisting the selfish
temptations which constantly beset us".14
6. The spread of the Internet also
raises a number of other ethical questions about matters like privacy,
the security and confidentiality of data, copyright and intellectual
property law, pornography, hate sites, the dissemination of rumor and
character assassination under the guise of news, and much else. We
shall speak briefly about some of these things below, while
recognizing that they call for continued analysis and discussion by
all concerned parties. Fundamentally, though, we do not view the
Internet only as a source of problems; we see it as a source of
benefits to the human race. But the benefits can be fully realized
only if the problems are solved.
II
About the Internet
7. The Internet has a number of
striking features. It is instantaneous, immediate, worldwide,
decentralized, interactive, endlessly expandable in contents and
outreach, flexible and adaptable to a remarkable degree. It is
egalitarian, in the sense that anyone with the necessary equipment and
modest technical skill can be an active presence in cyberspace,
declare his or her message to the world, and demand a hearing. It
allows individuals to indulge in anonymity, role-playing, and
fantasizing and also to enter into community with others and engage in
sharing. According to users' tastes, it lends itself equally well to
active participation and to passive absorption into "a
narcissistic, self-referential world of stimuli with near-narcotic
effects".15 It can be used to break down the isolation
of individuals and groups or to deepen it.
8. The technological configuration
underlying the Internet has a considerable bearing on its ethical
aspects: People have tended to use it according to the way it was
designed, and to design it to suit that kind of use. This ‘new'
system in fact dates back to the cold war years of the 1960s, when it
was intended to foil nuclear attack by creating a decentralized
network of computers holding vital data. Decentralization was the key
to the scheme, since in this way, so it was reasoned, the loss of one
or even many computers would not mean the loss of the data.
An idealistic vision of the free
exchange of information and ideas has played a praiseworthy part in
the development of the Internet. Yet its decentralized configuration
and the similarly decentralized design of the World Wide Web of the
late 1980s also proved to be congenial to a mindset opposed to
anything smacking of legitimate regulation for public responsibility.
An exaggerated individualism regarding the Internet thus emerged.
Here, it was said, was a new realm, the marvelous land of cyberspace,
where every sort of expression was allowed and the only law was total
individual liberty to do as one pleased. Of course this meant that the
only community whose rights and interests would be truly recognized in
cyberspace was the community of radical libertarians. This way of
thinking remains influential in some circles, supported by familiar
libertarian arguments also used to defend pornography and violence in
the media generally.16
Although radical individualists and
entrepreneurs obviously are two very different groups, there is a
convergence of interests between those who want the Internet to be a
place for very nearly every kind of expression, no matter how vile and
destructive, and those who want it to be a vehicle of untrammeled
commercial activity on a neo-liberal model that "considers profit
and the law of the market as its only parameters, to the detriment of
the dignity of and the respect due to individuals and peoples".17
9. The explosion of information
technology has increased the communication capabilities of some
favored individuals and groups many times over. The Internet can serve
people in their responsible use of freedom and democracy, expand the
range of choices available in diverse spheres of life, broaden
educational and cultural horizons, break down divisions, promote human
development in a multitude of ways. "The free flow of images and
speech on a global scale is transforming not only political and
economic relations between peoples, but even our understanding of the
world. It opens up a range of hitherto unthinkable
possibilities".18 When based upon shared values rooted
in the nature of the person, the intercultural dialogue made possible
by the Internet and other media of social communication can be "a
privileged means for building the civilization of love".19
But that is not the whole story.
"Paradoxically, the very forces which can lead to better
communication can also lead to increasing self-centeredness and
alienation".20 The Internet can unite people, but it
also can divide them, both as individuals and as mutually suspicious
groups separated by ideology, politics, possessions, race and
ethnicity, intergenerational differences, and even religion. Already
it has been used in aggressive ways, almost as a weapon of war, and
people speak of the danger of ‘cyber-terrorism.' It would be
painfully ironic if this instrument of communication with so much
potential for bringing people together reverted to its origins in the
cold war and became an arena of international conflict.
III
Some Areas Concern
10. A number of concerns
about the Internet are implicit in what has been said so far.
One of the most important of these
involves what today is called the digital divide—a form of
discrimination dividing the rich from the poor, both within and among
nations, on the basis of access, or lack of access, to the new
information technology. In this sense it is an updated version of an
older gap between the ‘information rich' and ‘information
poor'.
The expression ‘digital divide'
underlines the fact that individuals, groups, and nations must have
access to the new technology in order to share in the promised
benefits of globalization and development and not fall further behind.
It is imperative "that the gap between the beneficiaries of the
new means of information and expression and those who do not have
access to them...not become another intractable source of inequity and
discrimination".21 Ways need to be found to make the
Internet accessible to less advantaged groups, either directly or at
least by linking it with lower-cost traditional media. Cyberspace
ought to be a resource of comprehensive information and services
available without charge to all, and in a wide range of languages.
Public institutions have a particular responsibility to establish and
maintain sites of this kind.
As the new global economy takes shape,
the Church is concerned "that the winner in this process will be
humanity as a whole" and not just "a wealthy elite that
controls science, technology and the planet's resources"; this is
to say that the Church desires "a globalization which will be at
the service of the whole person and of all people".22
In this connection it should be borne
in mind that the causes and consequences of the divide are not only
economic but also technical, social, and cultural. So, for example,
another Internet ‘divide' operates to the disadvantage of women,
and it, too, needs to be closed.
11. We are particularly concerned about
the cultural dimensions of what is now taking place. Precisely as
powerful tools of the globalization process, the new information
technology and the Internet transmit and help instill a set of
cultural values—ways of thinking about social relationships,
family, religion, the human condition—whose novelty and glamour
can challenge and overwhelm traditional cultures.
Intercultural dialogue and enrichment
are of course highly desirable. Indeed, "dialogue between
cultures is especially needed today because of the impact of new
communications technology on the lives of individuals and
peoples".23 But this has to be a two-way street.
Cultures have much to learn from one another, and merely imposing the
world view, values, and even language of one culture upon another is
not dialogue but cultural imperialism.
Cultural domination is an especially
serious problem when a dominant culture carries false values inimical
to the true good of individuals and groups. As matters stand, the
Internet, along with the other media of social communication, is
transmitting the value-laden message of Western secular culture to
people and societies in many cases ill-prepared to evaluate and cope
with it. Many serious problems result—for example, in regard to
marriage and family life, which are experiencing "a radical and
widespread crisis"24 in many parts of the world.
Cultural sensitivity and respect for
other people's values and beliefs are imperative in these
circumstances. Intercultural dialogue that "protects the
distinctiveness of cultures as historical and creative expressions of
the underlying unity of the human family, and...sustains understanding
and communion between them" 25 is needed to build and
maintain the sense of international solidarity.
12. The question of freedom of
expression on the Internet is similarly complex and gives rise to
another set of concerns.
We strongly support freedom of
expression and the free exchange of ideas. Freedom to seek and know
the truth is a fundamental human right,26 and freedom of
expression is a cornerstone of democracy. "Man, provided he
respects the moral order and the common interest, is entitled to seek
after truth, express and make known his opinions...he ought to be
truthfully informed about matters of public interest".27
And public opinion, "an essential expression of human nature
organized in society," absolutely requires "freedom to
express ideas and attitudes".28
In light of these requirements of the
common good, we deplore attempts by public authorities to block access
to information—on the Internet or in other media of social
communication—because they find it threatening or embarrassing
to them, to manipulate the public by propaganda and disinformation, or
to impede legitimate freedom of expression and opinion. Authoritarian
regimes are by far the worst offenders in this regard; but the problem
also exists in liberal democracies, where access to media for
political expression often depends on wealth, and politicians and
their advisors violate truthfulness and fairness by misrepresenting
opponents and shrinking issues to sound-bite dimensions.
13. In this new environment, journalism
is undergoing profound changes. The combination of new technologies
and globalization has "increased the powers of the media, but has
also made them more liable to ideological and commercial
pressures",29 and this is true of journalism as well.
The Internet is a highly effective
instrument for bringing news and information rapidly to people. But
the economic competitiveness and round-the-clock nature of Internet
journalism also contribute to sensationalism and rumor-mongering, to a
merging of news, advertising, and entertainment, and to an apparent
decline in serious reporting and commentary. Honest journalism is
essential to the common good of nations and the international
community. Problems now visible in the practice of journalism on the
Internet call for speedy correcting by journalists themselves.
The sheer overwhelming quantity of
information on the Internet, much of it unevaluated as to accuracy and
relevance, is a problem for many. But we also are concerned lest
people make use of the medium's technological capacity for customizing
information simply to raise electronic barriers against unfamiliar
ideas. That would be an unhealthy development in a pluralistic world
where people need to grow in mutual understanding. While Internet
users have a duty to be selective and self-disciplined, that should
not be carried to the extreme of walling themselves off from others.
The medium's implications for psychological development and health
likewise need continued study, including the possibility that
prolonged immersion in the virtual world of cyberspace may be damaging
to some. Although there are many advantages in the capacity technology
gives people to "assemble packages of information and services
uniquely designed for them", this also "raises an
inescapable question: Will the audience of the future be a multitude
of audiences of one?...What would become of solidarity—what
would become of love—in a world like that?" 30
14. Standing alongside issues that have
to do with freedom of expression, the integrity and accuracy of news,
and the sharing of ideas and information, is another set of concerns
generated by libertarianism. The ideology of radical libertarianism is
both mistaken and harmful—not least, to legitimate free
expression in the service of truth. The error lies in exalting freedom
"to such an extent that it becomes an absolute, which would then
be the source of values....In this way the inescapable claims of truth
disappear, yielding their place to a criterion of sincerity,
authenticity and ‘being at peace with oneself"'.31
There is no room for authentic community, the common good, and
solidarity in this way of thinking.
IV
Recommendations and
Conclusions
15. As we have seen, the virtue of
solidarity is the measure of the Internet's service of the common
good. It is the common good that supplies the context for considering
the ethical question: "Are the media being used for good or
evil?" 32
Many individuals and groups share
responsibility in this matter—for example, the transnational
corporations of which we spoke above. All users of the Internet are
obliged to use it in an informed, disciplined way, for morally good
purposes; parents should guide and supervise children's use.33
Schools and other educational institutions and programs for children
and adults should provide training in discerning use of the Internet
as part of a comprehensive media education including not just training
in technical skills—‘computer literacy' and the
like—but a capacity for informed, discerning evaluation of
content. Those whose decisions and actions contribute to shaping the
structure and contents of the Internet have an especially serious duty
to practice solidarity in the service of the common good.
16. Prior censorship by government
should be avoided; "censorship...should only be used in the very
last extremity".34 But the Internet is no more exempt
than other media from reasonable laws against hate speech, libel,
fraud, child pornography and pornography in general, and other
offenses. Criminal behavior in other contexts is criminal behavior in
cyberspace, and the civil authorities have a duty and a right to
enforce such laws. New regulations also may be needed to deal with
special ‘Internet' crimes like the dissemination of computer
viruses, the theft of personal data stored on hard disks, and the
like.
Regulation of the Internet is
desirable, and in principle industry self-regulation is best.
"The solution to problems arising from unregulated
commercialization and privatization does not lie in state control of
media but in more regulation according to criteria of public service
and in greater public accountability".35 Industry
codes of ethics can play a useful role, provided they are seriously
intended, involve representatives of the public in their formulation
and enforcement, and, along with giving encouragement to responsible
communicators, carry appropriate penalties for violations, including
public censure.36 Circumstances sometimes may require state
intervention: for example, by setting up media advisory boards
representing the range of opinion in the community.37
17. The Internet's transnational,
boundary-bridging character and its role in globalization require
international cooperation in setting standards and establishing
mechanisms to promote and protect the international common good.38
In regard to media technology, as in regard to much else, "there
is a pressing need for equity at the international level".39
Determined action in the private and public sectors is needed to close
and eventually eliminate the digital divide.
Many difficult Internet-related
questions call for international consensus: for example, how to
guarantee the privacy of law-abiding individuals and groups without
keeping law enforcement and security officials from exercising
surveillance over criminals and terrorists; how to protect copyright
and intellectual property rights without limiting access to material
in the public domain—and how to define the ‘public domain'
itself; how to establish and maintain broad-based Internet
repositories of information freely available to all Internet users in
a variety of languages; how to protect women's rights in regard to
Internet access and other aspects of the new information technology.
In particular, the question of how to close the digital divide between
the information rich and the information poor requires urgent
attention in its technical, educational, and cultural aspects.
There is today a "growing sense of
international solidarity" that offers the United Nations system
in particular "a unique opportunity to contribute to the
globalization of solidarity by serving as a meeting place for states
and civil society and as a convergence of the varied interests and
needs...Cooperation between international agencies and nongovernmental
organizations will help to ensure that the interests of
states—legitimate though they may be—and of the different
groups within them, will not be invoked or defended at the expense of
the interests or rights of other peoples, especially the less
fortunate".40 In this connection we hope that the
World Summit of the Information Society scheduled to take place in
2003 will make a positive contribution to the discussion of these
matters.
18. As we pointed out above, a
companion document to this one called The Church and Internet speaks
specifically about the Church's use of the Internet and the Internet's
role in the life of the Church. Here we wish only to emphasize that
the Catholic Church, along with other religious bodies, should have a
visible, active presence on the Internet and be a partner in the
public dialogue about its development. "The Church does not
presume to dictate these decisions and choices, but it does seek to be
of help by indicating ethical and moral criteria which are relevant to
the process—criteria which are to be found in both human and
Christian values".41
The Internet can make an enormously
valuable contribution to human life. It can foster prosperity and
peace, intellectual and aesthetic growth, mutual understanding among
peoples and nations on a global scale.
It also can help men and women in their
age-old search for self-understanding. In every age, including our
own, people ask the same fundamental questions: "Who am I? Where
have I come from and where am I going? Why is there evil? What is
there after this life?" 42 The Church cannot impose
answers, but she can—and must—proclaim to the world the
answers she has received; and today, as always, she offers the one
ultimately satisfying answer to the deepest questions of
life—Jesus Christ, who "fully reveals man to himself and
brings to light his most high calling".43 Like today's
world itself, the world of media, including the Internet, has been
brought by Christ, inchoately yet truly, within the boundaries of the
kingdom of God and placed in service to the word of salvation. Yet
"far from diminishing our concern to develop this earth, the
expectancy of a new earth should spur us on, for it is here that the
body of a new human family grows, foreshadowing in some way the age
which is to come".44
Vatican City, February 22, 2002,
Feast of the Chair of St. Peter the Apostle.
John P. Foley
President
Pierfranco Pastore
Secretary
Endnotes
(1) Pontifical Council for Social
Communications, Pastoral Instruction Aetatis Novae on Social
Communications on the twentieth anniversary of Communio et
progressio, n. 4.
(2) Pontifical Council for Social
Communications, The Church and Internet.
(3) Cf. Pontifical Council for Social
Communications, Ethics in Communications, n. 5.
(4) Ibid., n. 21.
(5) Vatican Council II, Gaudium et
spes, n. 26; cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 1906.
(6) John Paul II,Sollicitudo rei
socialis, n. 38.
(7) John Paul II, Address to the
Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences, n. 2, April 27, 2001.
(8) John Paul II, Post-Synodal
Apostolic Exhortation Ecclesia in America, n. 20.
(9) John Paul II, Address to the
Diplomatic Corps Accredited to the Holy See, n. 3, January 10, 2000.
(10) Address to the Pontifical Academy
of Social Sciences, n. 2.
(11) Ibid., n. 3.
(12) Pontifical Commission for Social
Communications, Pastoral Instruction on the Means of Social
Communication, Communio et progressio, n. 19.
(13) Address to the Diplomatic Corps,
n. 4.
(14) John Paul II, Apostolic Letter Novo
millennio ineunte, n. 43.
(15) Ethics in Communications,
n. 2.
(16) Pontifical Council for Social
Communications, Pornography and Violence in the Communications
Media: A Pastoral Response, n. 20.
(17) Ecclesia in America, n. 56.
(18) Message for the Celebration of the
World Day of Peace 2001, n. 11.
(19) Ibid., n. 16.
(20) John Paul II, Message for the 33rd
World Communications Day, n. 4, January 24, 1999.
(21) John Paul II, Message for the 31st
World Day of Communications, 1997.
(22) Address to the Pontifical Academy
of Social Sciences, n. 5.
(23) Ibid., n. 11.
(24) Novo millennio ineunte, n.
47.
(25) Message for the World Day of Peace
2001, n. 10.
(26) John Paul II, Centesimus annus,
n. 47.
(27) Gaudium et spes, n. 59.
(28) Communio et progressio, nn.
25, 26.
(29) John Paul II, Address to the
Jubilee of Journalists, n. 2, June 4, 2000.
(30) Ethics in Communications, n.
29.
(31) John Paul II,Veritatis splendor,
n. 32.
(32) Ethics in Communications,
n. 1.
(33) Cf. John Paul II, Post-Synodal
Apostolic Exhortation Familiaris consortio, n. 76.
(34) Communio et progressio, n.
86.
(35) Aetatis Novae, n. 5.
(36) Cf. Communio et progressio,
n. 79.
(37) Ibid., n. 88.
(38) Cf. Address to the Pontifical
Academy of Social Sciences, n. 2.
(39) Ethics in Communications,
n. 22.
(40) John Paul II, Address to the UN
Secretary General and to the Administrative Committee on Coordination
of the United Nations, nn. 2, 3, April 7, 2000.
(41) Aetatis Novae, n. 12.
(42) John Paul II, Encyclical Letter Fides
et ratio, n. 1.
(43) Gaudium et spes, n. 22.
(44) Ibid., n. 39.
|
