Ben Tarnoff on the Privatized Internet: Why Public Participation is Essential for a Fair Digital Future

“If the internet is broken, how do we fix it?” This thought-provoking question comes from tech writer Ben Tarnoff in his book Internet for the People (2022). The book dives into the history of the internet, especially focusing on who owns the infrastructure that makes it work. Tarnoff takes a critical look at how the internet evolved from a U.S. government project to a space largely controlled by a few big tech companies while also discussing the major challenges we face today.

Tarnoff’s work is more than just historical; it acts as a call for change. He highlights various experiments and ideas that propose new ways to design, own, and govern the internet. These initiatives suggest a future where everyday users have a say in how the technology they rely on is managed.

Question. Your title features “the people.” Does this choice emphasize a sense of citizenship?

Answer. Yes, using “people” instead of “users” changes the perspective. “Users” implies a passive role, limiting our view of our connection to the internet. When we think of people, we recognize digital citizenship and a political community. The internet often treats us as isolated individuals, but that’s not the only way to engage with it. Most terms we use to describe our digital world come from the industry itself—like platform, cloud, or AI. If the industry shapes the language, how about we create our own metaphors?

Q. You mention pipes as a metaphor for the internet’s infrastructure. Why don’t we talk about them more often?

A. We tend to take them for granted, viewing them as invisible until we see our costly internet bills. Surprisingly, the U.S. has some of the highest internet costs for service that is often subpar. This reality stems from the concentration of power in the broadband market. It’s crucial to pay attention to this layer of infrastructure, as it holds the key to pushing the internet towards a fairer model.

Q. Should the government ensure everyone has internet access?

A. Absolutely. These discussions may seem detailed, but they relate to larger questions about democracy. At its core, democracy means people should have the resources to live self-determined lives. You can’t do that if you’re struggling with hunger or homelessness. High-quality internet access is essential for participating in modern society. We saw this during the pandemic when families flocked to public spaces for Wi-Fi to complete schoolwork or access unemployment benefits.

Q. What’s the second principle?

A. People need a say in the decisions that impact their lives. This is tough in a privatized system, which is why we need to democratize the internet infrastructure.

Q. Do you support a community infrastructure model?

A. Yes. The U.S. has many community networks—publicly or cooperatively owned—like rural cooperatives in North Dakota. These networks often provide better service at a lower cost compared to monopolistic companies. They also foster democratic participation by allowing members to vote on leadership. Similar community networks exist worldwide, such as Guifi.net in Catalonia.

Q. How has the connection between Trump and Big Tech shaped U.S. politics?

A. Elon Musk’s takeover of Twitter shows the risks of letting market forces dominate our information landscape. There’s a growing sense that the quality of our online experiences is slipping. Many factors contribute to this decline, including the overwhelming presence of low-quality AI content. I have doubts about rallying around internet issues, but overall societal mobilization seems challenging in the current climate.

Q. Do large platforms feel like shopping malls to us?

A. Yes, the design of these platforms can encourage consumer behavior, similar to how shopping malls are structured. Yet, malls offer some freedom—like teenagers hanging out or skating. Even in digital spaces, users have some agency; it’s vital to acknowledge that. We should explore how to create alternatives that provide more meaningful interactions, rather than just acting as online shopping venues.

Q. What makes establishing more equitable digital spaces difficult?

A. There are significant challenges rooted in the decline of community life in the U.S. Civic groups, unions, and clubs are less present today, leading to social isolation. This isolation makes it harder for people to come together and create associations that can drive change.

Q. How does regulation influence internet democratization?

A. Regulation can have various impacts, so we must clarify our goals. I aim for the creation of public and cooperative entities that ensure democratic participation. This shift would mean these organizations take over functions currently held by profit-driven companies. Public policy can be a strong tool for fostering these alternatives. We need new ideas about how the public sector can support and cultivate a more democratic internet. This isn’t something that will happen by chance; it requires active government involvement.

Q. Is fixing internet issues a test of our imagination?

A. Yes, the power of collective imagination matters. It’s not just about one person’s ideas but about a community working together. The transformation of the internet we see since the 1990s led to a focus on profit. To create a fairer internet, we need creativity and cooperation to find better governance and social structures.