> Tom Worthington wrote:
> >
> > At 10:57 AM 3/10/97 +1000, Greg Taylor wrote:
> >
> > >Does the Internet community need warnings on television?...
> >
> > People who are new to the Internet do need such warnings. They may
> believe
> > everything they see on the computer screen and so be taken in, or be
> too
> > worried to log on in the first place.
>
> Please, new Internet users have very little time to watch TV. I find
> it
> hard
> to believe that taxpayer cash was used to make TV ads to get to
> Internet
> users. I would have imagined online Ads... {as an aside, I remember
> Ostrich
> Ads on TV during the Business Sunday show.......}
>
My thoughts on this are several fold.
The "new internet user" is not a single species, my observations as a
trainer and support person is that there is probably at least 2 types of
"new internet user"
a) the gung-ho variety who push and pull and grunt and groan, spend
heaps of online time and gets to where they're going eventually (the
hare) and their lives are changed one way or another by the Internet.
Then there's
b) those who join the internet for whatever reason, maybe to get an
email address cos they have to, and they are gentle creatures, like the
archetypical tortoise. They consume very little of Internet resources
and their lives are largely unchanged by their having access to the
Internet.
The first of these varieties will jump into anything they fancy and will
get burned, or not, as they would in RL; however the second are a lot
like the "great unwashed" of the mainstream population - they are
cautious and remain to be convinced of anything to do with the
Internet. It is these and the mainstream who would benefit from a
television and other forms of mass media education campaign.
Now the ACCC venture into scamsville might not be the way to do that,
but I'd be really surprised, if the spin put on the Spam Day is not a
positive one, indicating just how like RL it really is, and caveat
emptor indeed applies just as much here as there!
I would see such an outcome as beneficial in getting people not yet
Internet users (or the second variety mentioned above) to the internet
where I, because I'm the originial Internet zealot, believe people can
derive many personal advantages and society can similarly reap great
benefit from the improved communication possibe in using the Internet.
> Current Internet users make up only a small proportion of the
population.
> > The rest will either not join if they see they will be at risk, or
> may be
> > the most vulnerable if they do join.
>
> Please, again give me a break. There is zero evidence in any research
> I
> have
> seen that would indicate "the population" holding back because of
> these
> perceived risks. Secondly, caveat emptor stands as always,
> everywhere.
> Maybe
> an educational pamphlet or documentation which ISPs and companies can
> freely
> distribute would be effective (any volunteers to write this up?)
Your statement of "zero evidence in any research" sums up the state of
research into the mainstream population, I believe research has not
adequately addressed the reasons why people **dont join** in the
Internet yet. And if we're looking at the "great unwashed" then a
pamphlet at access providers premises isn't going to get to the target
is it?
Brenda
-- Brenda Aynsley - http://www.iss.net.au/bpabio.html Phone:+61 8 8357 8844 Fax:+61 8 8373 3829 Mobile:+61 19 662 988 Internet Support Services Australia-Education and Support Services Vice President, South Australia Internet Association Vice Chairman, Electronic Frontiers Australia Foundation Member ISOC-AU