At the same time, careful thought will need to be devoted on a continuing basis to an inherent tension with the Internet and the issue of diversity of information. The technical design of the Internet facilitates personalized, customized consumption that provides extensive choice and benefits for individuals. However, this trend also creates a negative potential for increased individualization, fragmentation and homogeneity. On the other hand, the distributed and open nature of the Internet offer opportunities for collective development and access to a diversity of general information resources that support democracy, shared experiences, learning and understanding, and social cohesion. While the former is conducive to the development of the consumer market, the latter provides collective benefits. To achieve social policy objectives pertaining to the development of human and social capital, social infrastructure and social cohesion, a rethinking of the roles of the federal government, community organizations and the use of online and other resources is required. To accomplish these developmental ends in the past, individuals and organizations had to have available specific and general interest intermediaries that ably and competently fulfilled needs and demands. Key questions are how should online technology be most appropriately integrated into these organizations, and what resources will be required, and from who, to do this successfully? General interest intermediaries expose people to a range of ideas, experiences, resources that complement cohesion and development (e.g., government, community networks, libraries). Specific intermediaries fulfill more specialize roles for individual social and economic activities (e.g., literacy centre, Media Awareness Network).

Many communities across Canada share similar obstacles and opportunities, but the capacity for individuals and communities to respond to these varies greatly depending on their socio-economic contexts. While communities and community organizations have a good idea of their needs, and have social relationships in place, for many a need exists for outside resources (funding, expertise, information, etc.) to help facilitate progressive change at the levels of the individual and community.

We are still very much in the development phase of the Internet. The need for legitimation of the use of the Internet to meet social, cultural and economic objectives means that our social contract will require an ongoing government role working with other social organizations and institutions. The federal role will require a constant rethinking of policy and regulatory initiatives in response to the dynamic changes in the market and communities. Key priorities in this role will include social and cultural content development; economic policy initiatives (including market stabilization, protecting the property rights of the market); support for public information intermediaries; support for institutions and organizations involved in human, social capital and, social and economic infrastructure development.