In California, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this summer announced an initiative that would replace some high school science and math texts with free, “open source” digital versions.

And given that students already get so much information from the Internet, iPods and Twitter feeds, he said, digital texts could save them from lugging around “antiquated, heavy, expensive textbooks.”

This is a refreshing take on the paper-versus-bytes debate that usually puts paper on the side of protecting jobs and the economy. And that’s because the protagonist in this story is the tax-paying public and their children, not the publishing industry that serves the public. Of course, the irony here is that the story is published in The New York Times, which continues to lose readership, revenue, and physical pages. When I picked up the Sunday edition this morning I was shocked; it was almost as light as the daily edition from years back. These are painful times, but as the Times article today suggests, there’s a bright side to the story about digital publishing that’s worth exploring. We’ve known that all along, but let’s thank the Times for the reminder. And note: the Times goes into the general topic of the future of news in great detail today. See the Sunday magazine article, “What’s a Big City Without a Newspaper,” which looks at the situation in Philadelphia, the city “that could end up being the first without a daily.”

Check out the discussion on Techmeme.

But the mobile phone companies are not the only ones failing to meet the challenge. Next are all the car companies, many which have responded to the debate by equipping their cars with hands-free audio systems. As Richtel notes, there’s good data suggesting that hands-free car talk may be even more dangerous than hand-to-the-phone for it lulls people into a false sense of security; you may be just as likely to get distracted on a hands-free system.

Of course, neither phone companies nor car companies can be expected to rush to the mantle of “thought leadership.” On the face of it, it’s bad business for these companies to speak out against distracted driving. There are phones to be sold — with the smart ones decisively outpacing the “dumb” ones — minutes to be sold, data plans to be sold, and yes, cars to be sold that are better equipped with the latest and greatest in safety features, including hands-free, which many consumers see as the state-of-the-art. But I’m waiting for at least one company to break from the pack before the inevitable happens, when consumers themselves come to the obvious realization that they too should speak up about distracted driving. This is the post-2.0 era, where so many issues cannot or will not wait for a brand to the lead the conversation. But from my perspective — the perspective of a communications consultant who advises companies on both their opportunities and duties in public affairs — it really doesn’t matter who speaks up first. We are all guilty parties to this affair. Who among us has never picked up a phone behind the wheel and dialled or texted or emailed or taken a photo, all the while knowing that it’s reckless — perhaps criminal — to do so when operating a one-plus ton piece of machinery on wheels? Like drunk driving, distracted driving may have to claim more lives before we all care enough to take serious action. Hope we will not have to wait long this time around. But device addiction, like many other post-2.0 consumer behavior, is rooted in a great need to stay connected, in a world that demands we stay connected. This is not going to be easy.