THE INTERNET AND CONTINUING

HISTORICAL DISCOURSE

By Hazel Dkken-Garcia

Emphasizing that the "culture in which the Internet is used" permeates"discourse on the Internet," this essay offers reflections on discourse(1) about the Internet, (2) communication technologies across time, (3)the future, (4) discourse online, and (5) the importance of discoursetoday. Final comments highlight questions about how Internet use mayreshape discourse, community, people's perceptions, and communicationbehavior.

The title, "The Internet and Continuing Historical Discourse," is usedhere to underscore that what resides in a culture in which the Internet is usedcontinues in discourse on the Internet {online). Discourse here, followingdefinitions by Norman Fairclough, Michel Foucault, Teun van Djik, andGunther Kress, means the ways subjects get "talked" about (orally andotherwise). As the expression in texts, "talk" about subjects both shapesculture and is culturally shaped. Discourse links a text to culture viapresuppositions residing in culture, to other texts via stored knowledge fromthem, and to discourse practices. While being shaped by culture and thecontext in which it occurs, discourse, of course, also shapes culture in that theway subjects get talked about affect people's attitudes and condition theirexpectations. Cultural differences spring from different beliefs about allelements of life, Murray G. Murphey reminds us; this includes beliefs abouttechnology, and it produces varying discourses.'

The subject may be divided into at least five categories: Discourse (1)about the Internet; (2) on the Internet (online); (3) about communicationtechnologies across time; (4) about tomorrow; and (5) importance today. Theintention here is to merely touch on each briefly and conclude by offeringmodest suggestions about some implications for historians. Study is neededto pursue generalizations and assumptions offered here. It is important tostress from the outset that, although many discourses exist simultaneouslythroughout all cultures and conflicting discourses often appear in one text,the singular form is used here for convenience. Further, while the focus hereis on the Internet, discussion necessarily extends to the broad "computerculture" of which it Is a part.

(1) Discourse about the Internet. Many themes, or models, in litera-ture about the Internet are familiar. The most pervasive theme, progress,recurs about emerging communication technologies through history. Con-ceptualized most often in terms of what humankind gains by virtue of its

Hazel Dkken-Garcia is a professor in the School of journalism and Mass Comrtniuicatioiiat the Universit}^ of Minnesota.

THEFUTURB OF THE ImERNir-THE , HISTORICM.DISCOURSE

j&MC QuarterlyVol. 75, No. 1Spring 199819-27

©lws A£;MC

19

emergence, the Internet is equated with progress and advancement ofcivilization. Another prominent theme emphasizes attendant harms -that is, what may be lost because of it. A third theme concerns inter-relationships - globally, for example, on an international scale, and univer-sally, regarding who has access and to what degree muUidiversity may berealized and reflected through this medium. The first part of this themerecurs across time, but emphasis on access and diversity belongs to thepresent age. A fourth theme, which seems new in part, involves what makesa whole individual - that is, what makes the most complete, productiveperson. Concerns about potential harm of new communication media arefamiliar from the past, but new dimensions appear in present-day attentionto the individual computer user, particularly in discourse about the Internetas conducive to creating isolationism vs. developing social interaction skills.

Looking at discourse about the Internet from individual, institutional,and social perspectives makes manageable the treatment of similarities anddifferences across time regarding communication technologies. At thebroadest social level, some universal truths are that people inherit a culturaltradition and approach interpretation of everything with ideas alreadv inmind, as Paul Ricouer reminds us and, as Murphey asserts, people drawupon, and never deviate very far from, the stock of concepts and beliefsprovided by their culture. Moreover, individual action, as Murphey empha-sizes, cannot be understood without taking its context into account. Suchtruths underscore, for example, as McChesney and others have emphasized,that the Internet does not bring more democracy or equality nor erase genderbiases and other biases entrenched in the culture.-

Also from a social perspective, a community theme, recurrent histori-cally in discourse about communication technologies, reflects a significantshift in present-day discourse. For example, nineteenth-century Americansexpected world peace and solutions to the gravest problems to follow thespread of printing and other communications technologies, but discourseabout the Internet emphasizes what some have called "community fluidity"and how community is formed. Also new is that the power to quickly formspecialized communities via the Internet raises a concern about who controlsinformation. Laura Gurak, for example, says this raises problems of exclu-sion, inaccurate information, introversion. In other words, she asks, whocontrols information and who can and should have power to use it?-'

From an institutional perspective, discourse about new communica-tion technologies across time shows a dominance of interest in the financial /business impact and applications in work and educational environments, butwhat seems to be new today is concern about institutional alterations to makeway for the technologies. A July 1997 Atlantic Monthly article pertaining topresent-day educational applications of the computer - most relevant ofthese three to purposes here - illustrates this and the progress theme. U.S.teacherspolled in 1996 ranked computer skills and media technology as more"essential" than study of European history, history, biology, chemistry,physics; and more important than learning practical job skills or readingmodern writers (such as Steinbeck and Hemingway) or classics (such as Platoand Shakespeare), or about such social problems as drugs and familybreakdown. A California task force of forty-six in 1995, the author reports,said computers offer more than anything else to remedy public schools'problems and are needed more than reduced class size, more hours ofinstruction, improved facilities, and higher salaries for teachers. Despitereductions in state aid to several New Jersey school districts, $10 million was

20 /ouRNAUSM & MASS CoMMUNJomcw QUAHTEFLY

spent on classroom computers. A Los Angeles elementary school musicprogram was cut so a technical coordinator could be hired, and teachingpositions in art, music, and physical education were eliminated fromMansfield, Massachusetts, schools while $333,000 was spent on computers.One Virginia school's art classroom was turned into a computer lab, and,across the nation, "technology education programs" have replaced mostshop classes.''

From the individual perspective, many themes emerge - some ofwhich are touched on below. Especially notable is concern about effects onthinking skills, another familiar theme. With the Internet, the fear is thatthinking skills diminish in people who spend endless hours communicatingelectronically in isolation at the expense of socially interactive behavior.Clifford Stoll writes that "anyone who's directed away from social interac-tions has a head start on turning out weird." "No computer can teach whata walk through a pine forest feels like," he adds. "Sensation has no substi-tute.""^

Some argue that pencil-and-paper work forces one to think throughimplications whereas computers, though useful for repeated calculations,are not conducive to innovative thought. Arguing that "the ability to touch,feel, manipulate, and build sensory awareness in the physical world" are theprimary foundations of reasoning, some warn that computer-driven activity-in-isolation over time will produce a mindlessness that will come to dominateand gradually "dumb down" tomorrow's adults. Some say electronicconveniences intended to improve writing skills seduce students, and thatword-processingcut-and-paste functions encourage patching together ("with-out thinking them through") materials to create "snazzy" looking papers.One English teacher reported that computer-generated essays are easilyrecognizable because they do not link or develop relationships among ideas.''Discourse about what makes a whole, productively functioning social indi-vidual seems new in relation to communication technologies. Two themesespecially stand out - that one is not a whole person without a balancebetween social interaction and solitude, and that broad, useful, well-devel-oped skills are necessary for a full life. Regarding social interaction, somesuggest that the computer culture promotes thinking of the mediated worldas more significant than the real world - as exemplified by so many peoplespending so much time looking at computer screens.

Regarding skills needed for developing as a complete, productivelyfunctioning individual, some argue the computer culture emphasis on the"virtual" over the real world minimizes the importance of face-to-faceconversation, careful listening, and clarity and individuality in expression,while it limits development of imaginations by teaching that one can getinformation without work or discipline merely by watching a screen. Thearticle referred to above reports that Hewlett-Packard rarely hires predomi-nantly computer experts, but looks instead for innovative, flexible peopleskilled at teamwork. Another company that provides computer trainingseeks to hire, instead of those with computer skills, people who have a goodfoundational education in the history of what the company works at (archi-tecture), and good speaking, writing and comprehension skills. Neil Post-man, who blames the computer culture for curtailment of traditional artseducation in favor of business-oriented studies, advocates educationfocused on "how to make a life" more than how to make a living/

2. Discourse Online. The Internet brings stronger emphasis to andinterest in informal, interpersonal conversation than has been true of preced-

DISCOURSE 21

ing media. Internet "talk" is closer to word-of-mouth. Discourse online heremeans literally talk on line plus the talk about that talk - which expressesconcerns ranging from le^al and ethical to limitations it puts on socialdevelopment.

Although the individual perspective cannot be discussed entirelyapart from the social realm, and emerging communication technologiesseem to have always raised issues about impact on individuals, discourseabout the Internet seems to draw more attention to the individual than hasthat surrounding previous emerging communication technologies. Particu-larly notable in talk about the whole person is the separate personae. On theInternet, people take on new personalities, typified by less inhibited behav-ior. That is, some communicate electronically what they would never sayin person to others. Some students, for example, who never speak in classand shun face-to-face consultations with teachers send them surprisinglyloquaciouse-mail messages. But moreserious undesirable conduct emerges,of which hostility via flaming is only one shocking example.** Online conver-sations, occuring when individuals are alone, lack social cues and theunpredictability of face-to-face talk; some say this retards imagination andmental agility — and may lack controls needed to keep people responsible.''

As in the novelty stages of previous communications technologies,Internet users unquestioningly accept information via the Internet that theywould not accept so readily from another medium, and, as Gurak says, usersrarely question communicators' ethics while accepting individuals theyhave never seen as credible and moral. Users accept on its face informationabout others' identity, credentials, occupation, profession, position, andauthority to speak about whatever is offered. One cannot ascertain frommessages whether users are who they say they are, Gurak reminds us."^

3. Discourse across Time. Professor Carey and his students havecontributed much to knowledge abouf responses to communications tech-nology over time. Larry Cuban has summarized recent patterns in adoptionsof computers for teaching purposes. Foremost among these are greatexpectations and promises, a lack of questioning of the claims, and a ten-dency fo incorporate new technologies based on speed and efficiency,"These not only recur in the historical record; they extend beyond the educa-tional arena. Similar to past responses, a fear that technology brings harmappears in discourse about the Internet (some of which has already beentouched on here), but this theme has new variations. Much stronger indiscourse about the Internet than that surrounding previous emergingtechnologies are emphases on skills, ability to use the medium, and impor-tance of its use by everyone. In fact, discourse reveals a kind of breathlessanxiety about keeping up in a rapidly changing world. That is, the messagecomes across clearly, tacitly or explicitly, that students especially must havethe necessary skills to access valuable resources (people and information)around the world.'^

Also different in present discourse is questioning of the whole educa-tional system and learning process, and the emphasis on community andmeaning. In fact, meaning as fluid vs. fixed seems to have gradually seepedinto consciousness with twentieth-century communications developmentsand come into sharp focus in discourse about the Internet.

4. Discourse about Tomorrow- Discourse surrounding new commu-nication technologies has always emphasized what they promise for thefuture. From an historical perspective, this shows that discourse in thepresent continues into the future, with reshaping, to be sure, as part of the

22

ongoing process and cultural reconfigurations around technologies' usage.Evidence of sucb discourse is abundant and familiar, and we need not dwellon it here, except to stress that cultural strains permeating online discoursetoday from the past wilt continue into tbe future - as likely tbe mostsignificant shaping mecbanism for wbat will happen in Internet develop-ment and usage.

5. Discourse Importance Today. Discourse has gained importancewitb tbe computer culture due to emphasis on community - shift in itsmeaning and the way people tfiink about it - arising from Internet use.Indeed, from tbe early twentieth century, community, in addition to place,has come to mean shared interests, symbols, beliefs, values, and interpreta-tions. Scholars have noted tbat the original ARPANET designers predictedin 1968 that future "on-line interactive communities" would rest on commoninterests rather than on shared geographic space, fn fact, one trait distin-guishing tbe Internet from other media is that it has no target community asa primary audience or as a result of its function. Rather, the Internetprimarify makes communities, Gurak has noted, pointing to the irreversibleestablishment of the idea of community as based on common goals andvalues as evidence of a significant shift in the way people think - fromemphasis on the individual to tbe relationship between the individual andthe community in which the individual functions. The concept of interpre-tive community, focused on values and culture, is defined by how itsmembers see the world - a group that shares certain habits of mind.'^"Interpretive communities" and "shared habits of mind" are common inreference to people linked by communications.

Sucb empbasis elevates the importance of ideology, Gurak says. Inturn, this elevates the importance of discourse - how people talk aboutsubjects. Particular discursive formations obtain among those who "sharehabits of mind/' and scholars increasingly emphasize the necessity of study-ing sucb formations for insighf into cultural and change processes.''^

Implications for Historical Research. The mosf interesting questionsfor historians may be about how uses of the Internet reshape discourse {indiffering cultures). Indeed, will the increased concern with ideology andimportance of discourse lead fo greater emphasis on discussions of politicalrelations? Wbat patterns of discourse are emerging on the Internet? Whatamong those is distinctive to fhe Internet, and bow are such distinctionsrelated fo general discourse? In other words, how is the Internet changingtbe way we talk about subjects - now and for fhe fufure?

The emphasis on communify, drawing attention to its creation, raisesquestions about what makes and sustains communify and how media arerelated. Study of such discursive formations can reveal insight about valuesand attitudes of a culfural sector, and, as noted, about change over time.

A basic question historians might ask is what belief system dominatesdevelopment of the Internef? And, given that scholars have noted howprevious communication technologies - fhe railroad, telegraph, fetepbone,radio, television - changed perceptions of distance, fime, space, and globalboundaries, anofber basic question is how use of the Internet changesperceptions.

The phenomenon of Internet personae raises new questions aboutcommunication behavior. Such problems as inaccuracies, manipulation ofinformation, sensationalism, and other excesses in fbe past have been ex-plained by exigencies of work, time, place, vested interests. We need fo lookagain af such excesses for how behavior relates fo conditions under which

THE FinvRE OF THE (WTEKNET - THE INTERNET AND CONTINUINC HISJORICAL DISCOURSE 23

communication occurs, particularly the physical presence of others and howand by whom the communicator may be held accounfable. How related isuninbibifed behavior to lack of face-fo-face communication and its attendantsocial cues? What impact might a belief thaf one can remain foreveranonymous have on fhe kind and degree of excesses in communicationconducf? Wbaf is at work in cases of those who, despite needing face-to-facediscussion, prefer communicating electronically in isolation? Such explora-tion may mean revisiting fhe gatekeeping role in communication. Howsignificanf in fhe credibility and shape of information are sucb factors aswhaf Gurak calls tbe moral bond with the community, sense of belonging,the concern for fhe whole, shared collecfive concerns? How important is thespeaker'spresence, or at least face-to-face encounters, to the conduct commu-nicators? The need to think in new ways about fhe impacf of a speaker'spresence in communication suggests that fhe long-sfanding quandary aboufthe power of pictures over printed words grows more and more simplisfic inthe face of issues emerging around fhe Infemet. What happens in communi-cafion when fbe fexf is complefely defached from any image of the speaker?

For historians, an issue is how fo preserve online discourse, docu-ment it, and study it, E.D. Hirsch wrote in 1967, in Murphey's words, "Allmeaning is someone's meaning. If an interpretation is fo have 'validity,' tohave greater or less probability of being correct than some ofber interpreta-tion, fhere has to be a parficular someone whose meanings is faken as fhestandard."''• Wbose "voice" dominates Internet discourse, and can if beidenfified? Who sets fhe standard for meaning, for interpretation, and forwhat is "correct?"

Finally, fhe long view of reactions fo communicafions technologysuggests generally liffle fhougbf abouf social implicafions of new technolo-gies during fbeir development, emergenf and noveify sfages - or suchconsiderations come as mere afferfhoughfs. If would seem fhat we mightlearn from study of this and of her pafferns in discourse about communicationtechnologies over time.

NOTES

1. Norman Fairclough, Discourse and Social Change (Cambridge, UK:Polity Press in association with Blackwell Publishers, 1992); NormanEairclougb, Media Discourse (London, New York, Sydney, Auckland: Ed-ward Arnold, 1995), 1-19; Michel Foucault, The Archaeology of Knowledge(London: Travinsfock Publications, 1972); History of Sexuality, vol. 1(Harmondsworfh: Penguin Books, 1981); and "The Order of Discourse," inLanguage and Politics, ed. M. Shapiro (Oxford, UK: Blackwell, 1982, 1984);Teun van Dijk, ed.. Handbook of Discourse Analysis, 4 vols, (London: AcademicPress, 1985); Teun van Dijk, News as Discowrsf-(Hillsdale, NJ: Eribaum, 1988);and "The Interdisciplinary Study of News as Discourse," in A Handbook ofQualitative Methodologies for Mass Communication Research, ed, Klaus Bruhnlensen and Nicholas W. lankowski (London and New York: Routledge,1991), 108-119; Gunfher Kress, "Ideological Structures in Discourse," inHandbook of Discourse Analysis, vol. 4: Discourse Anati/sis in Society, ed. Teunvan Dijk (London, Orlando, San Diego, New York, Toronto, Montreal, Sydey,Tokyo: Academic Press, 1985), 27-42.

2. Paul Ricouer, Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences (NY: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1989), 44,57; MurrayG. Murpbey,P/i//osop/iJi:fl/FoMndflf/o«s

24 JOURNALISM & MASS CoMMUNxymoN QuARTERLr

of Historical Knowledge (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1994),281-82; Robert McChesney, "The Internet and U.S. CommunicaHon Policy-Making in Hi.storical and Critical Perspective," journal of CommunicaHon 46(winter 1996): 112-17.

3. Laura Gurak, Persuasion and Privacy in Cyberspace (New fiaven: YaleUniversity Press, 1997): 6.

4. ToddOppenheimer, "The Computer Delusion," ThiMfifl)ificMo»f/i/y,Jufy 1997, 46.

5. Clifford Stoll, Silicon Snake OU: Second Thoughts on the InformationHighivay (NY: Anchor Books, 1995), 136,139,

6. Oppcnheimer, "The Computer Delusion," 52-54; Stoll, Silicon SnakeOil, 23-26.

7. Cited by Oppenheimer, 53.8. Martin Lea, Tim O'Shea, Pat Gund, and Russell Spears, "'Flaming' in

Computer-Mediated Communication: Observations, Explanations, Implica-tions," in Contexts in Computer-Mediated Communication, ed. Martin Lea(London: Harvester Wheatsheaf, 1992), 89-102.

9. Gurak, Persuasion, 14-16,10. Gurak, Persuasion, 14-16.11. James Carey, Communication as Cw/fur̂ (Boston: Unwin Hyman, 1989);

Daniel Czitrom, Media and the American Mind: From Morse to McLuhan(Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1982); Carolyn Marvin,Wlicn Old Technologies Were New: Thinking About Electric Communication in theLate Nineteenth Century (NY, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1988); LarryCuban, Teachers and Machines: The Ctassrootn Use of Technotogi/ Since 1920(1986), cited in Oppenheimer, "The Computer Delusion," 46.

12. Stoll, Silicon Snake Oil, 11-12; 25.13. Howard Rheingold, The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the Elec-

tronic Frontier (NY: HarperPerennial, A Division of Harper Collins Publish-ers, 1994), 24; Laura Gurak, "Technology, Community, and Technical Com-munication on the Internet: The Lotus Marketplace and ClipperChip Contro-versies," journal of Business and Technical Communication 10 (January 1996): 84,

14. Norman Fairclough, Media Discourse (London, New York, Sydney,Auckland: Edward Arnold, 1995), 2, 47-48, 52,

L5. E.D, Hirsch Jr,, Validity in Interpretation (New Haven, CN: YaleUniversity Press, 1967), 225, cited in Murphey, 279.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Gerald Brock and Gregory L. Rosston, eds. The Internet and Telecommunica-tions Policy: Selected Papers from the 1995 Telecommunications PolicyResearch Conference. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,Publishers, 1996.

Stanley D. Brunn and Thomas R, Leinbach, eds. Collapsing Space & Time:Geographic Aspects of Communication and Information. London:HarperCollins Academic, 1991.

Wilson Dizard Jr., Meganet: How the Global Communications Network WillConnect Everyone ou Earth. Boulder: Westview Press, A Division ofHarperCollins Publishers, Inc., 1997.

Norman Eairclough, Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge, UK: Polity Pressin Association with Blackwell Publishers, 1992.

NormanFairciough,MerfiflDiscourse. London, New York, Sydney, Auckland:

THE FUTURE or THE /NTTRNET- T ^ JNTERNET A \ D ComiNUiHG HISIORICM. DISCOURSE 25

Edward Arnold, 1995.Richard A. Gershon, The Transnational Media Corporation: Global Messages and

Free Market Competition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,Publishers, 1997,

Stephen Graham and Simon Marvin, Telecommunications and the City: Elec-tronic Spaces, Urban Places. London and New York: Routledge, 1996.

Laura Gurak, Persuasion and Privacy in Cyberspace: The Online Protests OverLotus Marketplace and the Clipper Chip. New Haven and London: YaleUniversity Press, 1997.

Klaus Bruhn Jensen and Nicholas W. Jankowski, eds. A Handbook of Qualita-tive Methodologies for Mass Communication Research. London and NewYork: Routledge, 1991.

Steven E, Miller, Civilizing Cyberspace: Policy, Power, and the InformationSuperhighway. New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company,1996.

Dinty W. Moore, The Fmperor's Virtual Clothes: The Naked Truth about InternetCulture. Chapel Hill: Aigonqin Books, 1995.

Murray G. Murphey, Philosophical Foundations of Historical Knowledge. Al-bany: State University of New York Press, 1995,

Michael Noll, Highway of Dreams: A Critical View Along the InformationSuperhighway. Mafiwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publish-ers, 1997,

Howard Rheingold, The Virtual Community: Homesteading on the ElectronicFrontier. New York: HarperPerennial, a Division of HarperCollins,published by arrangement with Addison-Wesley, 1994.

Clifford Stoll, Silicon Snake Oil. New York, London, Toronto, Sydney, Auckland:Anchor Books, published by arrangement with Doubleday, 1996.

Jenny Teichman, Social Ethics. Cambridge, MA, and Oxford, UK: BlackwellPublishers, Inc., 1996.

Teun van Dijk, ed. Handbook of Discourse Analysis. 4 vols. London: AcademicPress, 1985.

Teun van Dijk, News as Discourse. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1988,

Articles

Michel Foucault, "The Order of Discourse," in M. Shapiro, ed.. Language andPolitics (Oxford, UK: Blackwel! Publishers, 1982,1984).

Meg Greenfield, "Back to the Future: The Science and Tedinology of the 21 stCentury Will Be Different, but We Won't Be," Newsweek SpecialInaugural Issue (January 27, 1997): 96

Laura J. Gurak, "TheMultifaceted and Novel Nature of Using Gyber-Texts asResearch Data," in Computer Networking and Scholarly Communicationin the Twenty-First-Century University, Teresa M. Harrison and Timo-thy Stephen, eds. (Albany: State University of New York, 1996): 151-165.

Laura J. Gurak, "Technology, Community, and Technical Communicationon the Internet: The Lotus Marketplace and Clipper Chip Controver-sies," journal of Business and Technical Communication 10:1 (January1996): 81^89.

Laura J, Curak, "Rhetorical Dynamics of Corporate CommunicaHon inCyberspace: The Protest over Lotus Marketplace," IEEE TransactionsOn Professional Communication 38:1 (March 1995): 2-10.

Laura J. Gurak, "Making Gender Visible: Extending Feminist Critiques of

26

Technology to Technical ComTnunication/' Technical CommiiukationQuarterly: 257-170.

Amy Harmon, Neio York Times, "Is Technology Robbing Americans of theGreat Vacation Escape?" Minneapolis Star Tribune (July 14, 1997):Section A-p3.

Peter Haynes, "The Computer Industry: The Third Age," The Economist(September 17, 1994): 3-22.

"Information Superhighway," The Freedom Forum: A Publication about FreePress, Free Speech and Free Spirit (May 1994): 4-7

Sandy Kleffman, "Virtual High School," Saint Paul Pioneer Press {July 24,1997): Section A-p. 4.

Gunther Kress, "Ideological Structures in Discourse," in Teun van Dijk,Handbook of Discourse Analysis: Vol. 4: Discourse Analysis in Society(London, Orlando, San Diego, New York, Toronto, Montreal, Sydney,Tokyo: Academic Press, 1985): 27-42.

Robert W. McChesney, "The Internet and U.S. Communication Policy-Making in Historical and Critical Perspective," journal of Communica-tion 46:1 {Winter 1996): 112-117.

Peter McGrath, "The Web: Infotopia or Marketplace?" Newsweek SpecialInaugural Issue 0anuary 27,1997): 82-84.

Todd Oppenheimer, "The Computer Delusion," The Atlantic Monthly July1997): 45-62.

James Romenesko, "Who's Plugged In?" Saint Paul Pioneer Press {June 1,1997): Section A-1, 10.

Richard Roper, The Chicago Sun-Times, "Cyber Suspense," Saint Paul PioneerPress (July 24, 1997): Section F-p. 12.

"Telecommunications Free-for-All," The Wall Street Journal {March 20,1995):Section R-1-26.

Teun van Dijk, "The Interdisciplinary Study of News as Discourse," in KlausBruhn Jensen and Nicholas W. Jankowski, eds., A Handbook of Quali-tative Methodologies for Mass Communication Research {London andNew York: Routledge, 1991): 108-119.

James P. Zappen, Laura J. Gurak, Stephen Doheny-Farina, "Rhetoric, Com-munity, and Cyberspace," Rhetoric Review 1:2 {Spring 1997): 400-419.

Unpublished Papers

Linlin Ku, "The Use and Perceived Outcomes of Electronic Messaging inOrganizations," presented to the Communication and TechnologyDivision of the 1997 International Communication Association An-nual Conference, Montreal.

27