The ideological effects of corporate database centered research: a response to Harris.

• Author: Tucker, Robert E.
• Position: Argumentation and Advocacy, this issue, p. 41

Professor Scott Harris gives a spirited and articulate defense of our activity's ability to encourage the production and use of radical information. His faith in democracy and the marketplace lead him to the conclusion that mechanisms and forces already at work in the information environment will prevent the homogenization of electronic databases, and the corresponding corporatization of academic debate. Although Professor Harris' optimism is admirable, in the specific case of a debate activity which is increasingly reliant on database gathered information, it is misplaced. While he is correct in claiming that an apocalyptic ending to contemporary debate practice is unlikely, he fails to refute the claim that its radical transformation is already underway.

Professor Hams argues that my original essay suffers from four significant problems: a flawed view of research, a flawed view of electronic resources, a flawed view of university libraries, and a flawed view of the marketplace of ideas. Each of these points of conflict deserves closer examination.

A DEFENSE OF MY VIEW OF RESEARCH

Professor Hams first concerns himself with what he takes to be my flawed view of debate research. Specifically he claims that my argument, "rests on the supposition that debaters rely exclusively on Lexis-Nexis and Westlaw as sources of information" (p. 41). This is not the case. At no point in my essay did I claim that debaters have totally abandoned the library. Clearly there are some who remain diligent enough to pursue a variety of information outlets. What I did argue, and what has been ignored in lieu of a straw person, is that there will be enormous pressure to rely more and more on the vastly more efficient electronic resources. This pressure will not eliminate library research, but it will discourage it.

While Professor Harris sees my essay as an apocalyptic cry that the end is near, I see it as a cautionary note analogous to calls for the maintenance of bio-diversity. just as there are species of animals and plants, there are species of argument. Instead of finches and tortoises, we have marxist arguments, feminist arguments, and capitalist arguments. Just as environmental changes rarely cause the immediate extinction of a particular species, our increasing reliance on corporate databases is unlikely to cause the immediate extinction of radical argument. It will, however, cause those arguments to fare worse than their competition. Over time this will...