Critics reaction

Winner article: To tell the truth, I did not understand much of this article, but many of the arguments he made I agree with. Turning everything that exists right now into a digital format is not practical. However, much like the advocates of the "information society," Winner did not have a large amount of evidence to support his claims, which were made in a fairly arrogant way.

Roszak article: At first glance at the text of the article and when it was published, it seems a bit out of date, as the Web hadn't even come close to being very public in 1986. Much of his arguments appear to be him holding onto the past and not wanting to change. Using Shannon's definition of "information" did not really help his argument, either, as that is a very simplified definition. Also, his analogy of the internet compared to the automobile, airplane, etc. does not really work, as they are completely different things.

Robins/Webster article: Many of the concerns about privacy and surveillance raised at the beginning of this article are similar to ones I have about an "information society" and ones that are popping up already in today's society. However, they use far too many buzzwords and do not define them well or at all, making the article difficult to wade through.