Technological Choices, Sponsors, and Politics

I find the role of sponsorship is a fascinating topic to discuss and argue the sponsors set the tone of what and how technology should be used.

In much of what we do in our daily lives revolve around decision-making processes, from personal to politics. The sponsors of technology are not just a group of people; they are members of a “club,” as Mel Gibson says in the movie Who Killed the Electric Car. Their club holds power and influence to control their agenda. Their power and influence are deep-rooted in political arena. They dictate their interest, both subjective and objective. Subjective interests are “social arrangements and policies” that impact people’s lives and objective interests are actions that meet people’s needs (Stone, 2002). 

A recent article in last week’s The Washington Post caught my attention. The article is about the next generation vending machines. The National Automated Merchandising Association (NAMA) is positioning some of hi-tech these vending machines in none other than the Capitol, the epicenter and source of power and influence of the sponsors. These hi-tech vending machines are outfitted with i-pod like interface to select products from a large number of choices.

Hesse (2010) wrote that the “vending industry is a $30 billion-a-year industry, completely embedded in our daily lives. To make sure that legislators don't forget that, NAMA set up a Coffee and Vending Innovation Showcase in the Cannon House Office Building's grandiose Caucus Room.” NAMA is packaging these products to get the attention of the policy makers on the Hill.

A congressional staffer Erin Ward was quoted as saying "The Association of Truck Stop Operators' pie reception was up there,” (Hesse 2010). Companies are flocking to where their products have the greatest source of positioning power. It’s nothing wrong. Innovation is the prime source of employment. As companies mature, their relative strength to provide employment goes down. But the point of this example is how sponsors are making sure that their products do not undercut their intentions and intended consequences.

The sponsors have become much too powerful to dictate the market. They are also incredibly resourceful and effective. They have also become highly “accessible” to the government. Furthermore, these groups have considerable power and significance in policy debates (Gormley and Balla 2008).

As sponsors’ power and influence continue to grow, it’d be impractical to ignore their impact on our lives. Rather, it’d be wise to use them as resources to shape the systems that provide the very source of nourishment and prosperity.