EDITORIAL PAGE — The digital nightmare

The age of the computer was supposed to have delivered us from the mountains of paperwork generated by our obsolete, pre-Information Age technologies. That deliverance seems decades away yet. If anything, paperwork is growing with the proliferation of computers.

The age of the computer was also supposed to have made information more accessible, if not cheaper (after the purchase of hardware, of course). It is becoming apparent, however, that accessibility to information in the Information Age is measured only by the depth of one’s pockets. This is happening across the country as governments computerize information. For example, the Ontario Ministry of Northern Development and Mines proposes to sell its digital version of the bedrock geology map of Ontario for $1,200 (plus $10 per diskette). That’s kind of pricey considering the old paper copy of the map cost something less than $20.

Now, a digitized version may offer features unthinkable in hard copy. It could, for instance, be manipulated to focus on a particular region of the province with some kind of overlay of particular minerals. We don’t know, however, because we’re not going to spend $1,200 to discover its capabilities. And beyond price, we doubt that many prospectors have the sophistication to manipulate such data, anyway.

Unfortunately, there are too many junior exploration companies that couldn’t possibly start paying these sums for government information. And that’s the point. The government says it is committed to aiding exploration in the province. Yet it has begun charging astronomical rates for digitized versions of old, cheap information formerly published in paper form and stored in good old bricks-and-mortar libraries.

The bedrock geology map is but one example. For a deeper understanding of the true costs of digitized information, consider the “digital nightmare” envisioned in a recent article of The Explorationist, published by the Porcupine Prospectors and Developers Association.

The nightmare begins as you enter a government library, whereupon you are charged an admission fee based on the number of hours you intend to stay there. The notes you take while in the library are measured to determine an information value and you are charged for the amount of information you take out of the library. Finally, if you make a photocopy, the per-page charge recovers all the costs associated with gathering the information on the page, preparing the document and storing it for the past 15 years. As a parting shot, you are informed that any report you write based on your research will be taxed at a special rate because you are using government-collected information.

In our computerized world, such fees are being contemplated in connection with digitized information. (Government is also being driven toward user fees by the call to whittle away at mounting deficits. This “cost-recovery” policy is a form of double taxation in that users pay not once, through corporate or personal income taxes, but twice, when the service is used. But that’s an argument for another day.)

We are not suggesting a retreat to paper products only. But for heaven’s sake, if a government is weighing the pros and cons of computerizing certain services, the eventual price tag must be part of the equation. Producing digital products few can afford is pointless.