Hilltop on Hill2010

Twenty-one Journalism and Corporate Communications & Public Affairs students in Meadows School of the Arts are studying in Washington, D.C., this October for the Hilltop on the Hill 2010 program. The program is endowed by the Bauer Foundation for CCPA students wanting to study political communication on location in D.C. and at the political party conventions, the Presidential Inauguration and the G8 Economic Summit. The students spend five days in the nation’s capital, where they visit media and governmental sites and are briefed by policy analysts, political communicators and journalists.

Read more from Hilltop on Hill2010

Exploring the many sides of net neutrality

An update from Christina, a junior CCPA major with minors in business and psychology:

DC2010WhiteHouse%5B1%5D.jpg As we walked into the building that housed the Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, I had very little idea that I would be discussing an issue that I would soon become deeply fascinated by and concerned with how it affected decisions in public policy.

(In photo: The White House by night.)

Net neutrality is a controversial topic that I acquainted myself with before the trip, or should I say, tried to acquaint myself. Only thing was that when I was researching it, I had a hard time really grasping the concept of what it meant to be pro net neutrality.

The first stop on the trip at Google clearly defined what net neutrality is and how it would affect Internet users. Net neutrality is basically allowing Internet users to use the Internet free of restrictions.

Rob Atkinson at ITIF engaged my thinking beyond the definition. Before our discussion with him, I had the chance to read up on some of his recent published articles. One article stood out completely: “Who’s Who in Internet Politics: A Taxonomy of Information.” This article went into depth about different subgroups of main players in IT politics – cyber-libertarians, social engineers, free marketers, moderates, moral conservatives, old economy regulators, tech companies and trade associations, and brick-and-mortars – and each player’s attitude about the Internet: individual empowerment vs. societal benefit and laissez-faire vs. government regulation. The dominant subgroup is composed of engineers who are on the government-regulation side of the spectrum.

Atkinson considers himself a moderate as a driving force for economic growth and social progress, and a “wonk” because he supports the side of an issue that allows for innovation and digital transformation while never limiting growth. I definitely got the impression that ITIF and, more specifically, Atkinson have a narrow and single focus on technology. Their ideology seemed to be mostly moderate centralism, where you really need to increase spending in technology without destabilizing economic support.

It’s hard to imagine that one day I will be able to originate such distinctive ideas about net neutrality or other political issues and have someone walk up to me and not only quote me, but also have a meaningful conversation about what it directly means to them.

Share this story:

    About Sarah Hanan

    This entry was posted in Hilltop on Hill2010. Bookmark the permalink.