How does the digital divide affect peoples and their cultures?

Created by Webering, Christine S, last modified by Anonymous on Feb 27, 2012

The Digital Divide has a tremendous impact upon the culture and the people of every region. Technology effects every culture in different ways. Sometimes for the better. Sometimes for the worse. But, technology changes culture forever.  For example in the United States, a technology rich country, components that create culture like relationships, communications, and art have been dramatically changed by technology. However, it seems like some specific customs and cultural traditions have remained unchanged.Can you imagine your life without the internet? Try imagining if you had never used a phone before. This is a reality for some of the poorest nations affected by the digital divide. Because they do not have access to technology people in technology poor nations suffer. However, in order to bridge the digital divide, people need access to technology. For example, below is a video of a rural village in Uganda that just had access to a telecommunication center. This telecommunication center will have a huge impact on the peoples culture and education. Technology brings cultural changes to each country it touches. However, let us home that some customs and traditions remain unchanged and preserved.

https://youtu.be/qt1rdqf6mHA 
 Effects of Digital Divide on businesses go farther than companies simply having access to technologies.  The gap that is present in different technological skill levels of employees using technological software is accounted for.  This gap can be a main reason of any slowed productivity.  If employees cannot effectively use the technology at their disposal in given situations, they can cause an even larger gap. When, or if, organizations require themselves to provide information to their employees or certain branches of their organization, can be one of the most efficient routes.  Different situations call for companies to make specific made memos or e-mails for individual employees.  Using non-technological ways to get this information to employees can greatly decrease productivity.  Being able to use technology to schedule meetings can increase a company’s level of production.  If the software that an organization uses does support booking of meetings, then they will be forced to use phone calls or e-mails for each individual employee. 

If an employee leaves their current organization, then the effects will be felt on a larger scale in respect to digital divide.  After the employee leave the organization, if that individual has sole access to certain key technologies they could withhold detrimental information.  The gap that presents itself between assistants and executives is also important.  The assistant could have been in charge of handling high volume of the simplest of operations.  Examples of this could be accessing e-mail, or using handheld organizers that have been provided to them.   “Employees who travel frequently on business usually need to check back in with the workplace periodically during their trip. Cell phones, handheld devices and laptop computers are crucial to maintaining contact while on the road, as are wireless plans that accommodate travel, including adequate number of minutes, clear reception and roaming capabilities.”[7]
..and Social Capabilities

One of the first aspects discussed when thinking about digital divide is the social impact is has on society.  Someone could gather that development opportunities of people could give good insight on the gap between people who are able to access the technology and those who are not.  Various illusions should be taken into consideration when exploring the gap in technology.  First being having time to reflect at the present time, as well as the differences in availability to technology should increase already existing differences.   These are loose concepts that do not do the complexity in the social digital divide justice, and the relationship between the incorporation of technology and the social transformation it could bring.  “For social groups that position a new understanding of this concept, factors that may potentiate the use of technology as a development tool are diverse, complex, and have interrelations that depend on the context, culture, and history of the group in which they are incorporated.”[8]
Knowing this information about communication technologies can be found as an element expands development.  To effectively maximize the potential of this depends on organizational aspects, the developmental skills or capacities that they possess, and also being able to integrate these aspects within their social identity.  The appropriation that a social group provides for a technology allows a company to be able to change their own living conditions, and also the transformation of technology through technological innovation within their social identity.  The cause-effect relationship hides important relationships between the digital divide and social gaps.  Differences in accessibility to technologies are thought to increase the current social difference.  This could draw the conclusion that more development in countries, regions, and individuals with increase access opportunities to those who have less.  This difference can be observed not only between countries, but inside of them also.  The digital divide is believed to be a direct product of social gaps brought forth by economic, political, social, gender, generations, geographic, as well as other inadequacies. 
Social Entrepreneurship 
Bill Clinton once said “It is dangerously destabilizing to have half the world on the cutting edge of technology while the other half struggles on the bare edge of survival”.  He tried to bring the digital divide problem to public attention in 1996 through improving public schools.  15 years later our technology has improved dramatically but the digital divide is still clearly here.  Government intervention in relation to the digital divide is still not likely; the responsibility to bridge the gap has fallen on private citizens and companies. 

 HISTORY OF DIGITAL DIVIDE

 In the late 1970s and through all of the 1980s, unequal access to computers, the internet, and other forms of communication technology were seen as distant problems of a space-aged 21st century, if they were even thought of at all. In the 1980s and before, home computers were rare, expensive, and an esoteric pastime of enthusiasts. The internet was merely a pay-per-email facilitation device used by scholars and top government officials, and cordless phones were all the rage. The World Wide Web (WWW), multimedia computers, and fiber optic networks were all still under construction by computer technicians, engineers, and Al Gore.It was not until the High Performance Computing Act passed on December 9, 1991 that mass internet access in the United States became a possibility. Aimed at bolstering the economy of the coming millennia, this bill proposed the creation of a high speed fiber optic network or what was called the National Information Infrastructure (NII). The bill’s effect on internet access was enormous. In the Fall of 1990 there were approximately 313,000 computers online throughout the United States, and by 1996 that number exploded to 10 million (Campbell-Kelly and Aspray 1996). Coupled with the introduction of the Mosaic web browser and the user-friendly Windows Operating System, fascination and wonder in the internet began to take off in American culture.In the latter half of the 1990s the internet phenomena captured the imagination of many. The internet was what the railroad, the automobile, and the telephone were in their respective eras. The internet was a revolution, and it was going to change the economy, communication, society, and create an ever-shrinking planet. The internet was thought to be so full of possibilities that anyone who was left out of the revolution was doomed to a life of unconnected alienation, missed opportunity, and information poverty, while those basking in the glow of a Yahoo! flashing computer screen were thought to be sophisticated, chic, and informed individuals making a prudent choice by getting connected. Nobody, it was thought, should be deprived of the internet, its alternative plane of existence (cyberspace), and the endless possibilities of its infinite human network.

As the internet’s mystique grew, the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) disseminated a report in July 1995 called Falling Through the Net: a Survey of the “Have Nots” in Rural and Urban America. Although not mentioning the exact phrase “digital divide”, this report found that poor people in general have the lowest penetration rates of NII, while those who were poor and actually had access to the internet in their homes were more likely to engage in “on-line services that facilitate economic uplift and empowerment” (http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ ntiahome/fallingthru.html). Assumed in the report was that the internet was a driver of empowerment and marker of equity. The hype behind the usefulness of internet was picking up steam.

Months after the NTIA’s initial report, the exact phrase “digital divide” began to surface along the American Psyche. According to chat room legend, Amy Harmon, a journalist at the Los Angeles Times, wrote a story in 1996 about a split between a husband and wife regarding the husband’s preoccupation with the internet. The wife, feeling ignored and unloved by her husband’s seemingly perpetual computer use, was threatening to leave him if he did not comply with her wishes. She described the rift between the husband and wife as a “digital divide”. Hence, the digital divide phrase became coined.

A short time later, Allen Hammond, a law professor at New York Law School, and Larry Irving, a political appointee at the Department of Commerce, began using the phrase “digital divide” much differently. Hammond and Irving used the phrase often in public speeches to describe a binary divide between the computer and internet haves and have nots. Much in the spirit of the NTIA’s initial Falling Through the Net report, Hammond and Irving pointed out that many classes of Americans such as women, African Americans, American Indians, low-income Americans, and the disabled all had disproportionately low computer and internet penetration rates compared to those who had computers and internet access in their homes. This marked the beginning of the current meaning of the phrase today.By 1999 the phrase “digital divide” became a common slogan for policy makers, non-profit organizations, and others involved in the high-tech sector. Its simplistic and alliterative tone gave decision makers something to rally behind as the public still began to adapt to the lightning fast progress of information communication technology (ICT). During this time, while the internet became exceedingly ubiquitous and prevalent within American society, households with internet access were becoming the norm. Gaps in access to the internet remained along racial, income, and geographic lines; however the NTIA and others suffered from a serious lack of data and inadequately demonstrated their argument.The NTIA’s first three Falling Through the Net reports of the 1990s really represented the government’s awakening to the ICT gap. Relying solely on Census data, the NTIA was only able to gather data on computer, telephone, and modem ownership, and did not account for other forms of internet access. Additionally, monitoring and demonstrating how the internet was actually used by the privileged and under-privileged was a near impossible task for the NTIA at the time. Focusing solely on ownership of ICT and ignoring how the technology was actually used prevented the NTIA and others from an in depth analysis of inequitable technology access (http://www7.nationalacademies. org/cstb/wp_digitaldivide.pdf).

As more information became available, experts began to rethink the digital divide and expand it beyond the binary haves and have not concept. As early as 2000, right before the dot.com bubble burst, author Steve Cisler began questioning the preciseness of the digital divide slogan and reframed the issue of internet access. He and others felt the term was over-simplistic, demeaning, and took “on a very different caste in an international context where problems are so much greater than in the United States” (Cisler 2000).

 He felt that the internet connection existed on a spectrum rather than a binary relationship. It was apparent to them that the line of thinking: “You are online or offline; you have a computer or you are without one; you are trained for the digital future, or you are in dead-end low paying work” was inconsistent with reality and condescending at the same time. He felt that people fall on a spectrum of connectivity where some benefit from high-speed access in their personal homes, others have slower cable-modem access, others have access in schools, libraries, or other public places, while others still choose not to be connected in the first place. Cisler reasoned that many people choose to be offline for many different reasons and to assume that someone remains offline is doomed to a life of hardship and disgrace is arrogant and techno-centric.

THE IMPORTANCE OF BRIDGING THE DIGITAL DIVIDE

 Access to computers and the Internet and the ability to effectively use this technology are becoming increasingly important for full participation in America’s economic, political and social life. People are using the Internet to find lower prices for goods and services, work from home or start their own business, acquire new skills using distance learning, and make better informed decisions about their healthcare needs. The ability to use technology is becoming increasingly important in the workplace, and jobs in the rapidly growing information technology sector pay almost 80 percent more than the average private sector wage.Technology, used creatively, can also make a big difference in the way teachers teach and students learn. In some classrooms, teachers are using the Internet to keep up with the latest developments in their field, exchange lesson plans with their colleagues, and communicate more frequently with parents. Students are able to log on to the Library of Congress to download primary documents for a history paper, explore the universe with an Internet-connected telescope used by professional astronomers, and engage in more active "learning by doing." Students are also creating powerful Internet-based learning resources that can be used by other students -- such as award-winning Web sites on endangered species, the biology of sleep, human perception of sound, and an exploration of the American judicial system.Access to computers and the Internet has exploded during the Clinton-Gore Administration. Unfortunately, there is strong evidence of a "digital divide" -- a gap between those individuals and communities that have access to these Information Age tools and those who don’t. In some instances, this divide is actually widening. A July 1999 report from the Department of Commerce, based on December 1998 Census Department data, revealed that:

Better educated Americans more likely to be connected. Between 1997 and 1998, the technology divide between those at the highest and lowest education levels increased 25%. In 1998, those with a college degree are more than eight times likely to have a computer at home and nearly sixteen times as likely to have home Internet access as those with an elementary school education.

 
The gap between high- and low-income Americans is increasing. In the last year, the divide between those at the highest and lowest income levels grew 29%. Households with incomes of $75,000 or higher are more than twenty times more likely to have access to the Internet than those at the lowest income levels, and more than nine times as likely to have a computer at home.Whites more likely to be connected than African-Americans or Hispanics. The digital divide is also persistent and growing along racial and ethnic lines. Whites are more likely to have access to the Internet from home than African-Americans or Hispanics have from any location. African-American and Hispanic households are roughly two-fifths as likely to have home Internet access as white households. The gaps between white and Hispanic households, and between white and African-American households, are now more than six percentage points larger than they were in 1994. However, for incomes of $75,000 and higher, the divide between whites and African-Americans has narrowed considerably in the last year.
In addition, data from the National Center for Education Statistics reveals a “digital divide” in our nation’s schools. As of the fall of 1998, 39 percent of classrooms of poor schools were connected to the Internet, as compared to 62 percent for wealthier schools.

Tackling the issues of the digital divide

 It’s clear that the digital age won’t be standing still while everyone catches up. Instead it will undoubtedly come out with more inventions and solutions than we can possibly think of at this moment. So what can be done to help those who are falling behind?

Access to technology
Having access to (or lack of) technology is obviously a main contributor to the digital divide, both in developing and developed countries. One strategy already in place is called ‘technology refresh’. This encourages people to allow their old computers to be refurbished and reused in public facilities or offered for low prices to qualifying residents. Other cities are negotiating bulk buys with technology suppliers, in order to bring costs down, or managing to secure credit accounts to help spread costs.
Technological advances, lower costs, and the prospect of endless entertainment delivered over the internet, will all help towards widening access, but it’s not going to completely solve the problem – or even close to.Access to technology is not always the problem, particularly when considering the digital divide in more developed countries – such as the UK. There are many people out there who just ‘don’t see the point’ in joining the digital life. If we are to change the attitudes of the ‘don’t need, don’t want’ type of people, we need to ‘market’ things such as the Internet and IT Skills, explaining the benefits and uses.

Understanding technology
“It’s not about owning a computer, it’s about understanding the values and life advantages of being online, and until you as an individual understand what that means to you, the piece of kit/technology is irrelevant. For example, people buy dishwashers because they make life easier and you don’t have to wash the dishes.” [John Fisher, CitizensOnline, 2004]
For those who don’t understand the technology out there, the idea of sending an instant message to a loved one half way around the world or buying a book from someone in China, all from your sofa, is enough to give your grandma a heart attack. Projects such as ‘teens teaching seniors’ are emerging to encourage people to learn these new skills and understand what the technology can do. This particular project encourages school pupils to set up local computer courses, with the support of their teachers, for the older generation. There are also many countries who have introduced state, nonprofit, and marketing initiatives that are designed to focus on specific areas, such as providing community access and training in poorer areas, training teachers, and getting schools connected.Once people understand the things they can do with a computer for example, they’ll be more inclined to explore new technology.

But what about those who are unable to use the technology?
There are still many people who are just unable to use or are disadvantaged when it comes to using technology – the blind, to name but one. Natalia Bakhareva, a teacher at Nizhny Novgotod School, Russia said “For students who are blind or visually impaired, computers are so important. They connect them to the world...”In order to remove the social exclusion posed by this, new technology needs designing in an engaging, and often simple way, not requiring any special skills. This is being seen in the market today – making technology ‘invisible’ through things like touch screens and voice activation for example. This idea of ‘simplicity’ needs to continue if we are to break the social barrier of the digital divide.In Kingston-upon-Hull, East Yorkshire, a company called Broadband Capital Limited have set up ‘The Independent Living Campaign on STREAM’. This campaign is designed to target vulnerable older people, providing them broadband access to local services and digital programmes through their existing television. As well as the traditional digital channels, users of this scheme can watch programmes specifically designed for them, such home safety, how-to’s, local events, and keep fit exercises. The whole service is provided with telephone support and a very clear and simple user interface. More about this scheme can be seen on the Broadband Capital Limited website www.broadbandcapital.co.uk .

Tackling those in poorer regions
As for the millions living in poorer regions of sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and Southeast Asia, it is unlikely that the wave of technology will hit them anytime soon. There are initiatives such as “cyber-cafes, wired village schools and mobile cellular phone schemes” [Norris P, 2001] which may bring around change, but these are only just being introduced to such areas.
Without the access to computers, and the skills to use them, many people are unable to access useful information such as job opportunities, health and child care information, through media such as The Internet. Considering that in the next eight years, according to Monthly Labour Review Online (November 2005,page 6) 6 out of every 10 new jobs will be in professional and service-related occupations requiring, at a minimum, a basic level of proficiency in computers. So it’s important that we give the vulnerable the support they need to satisfy the criteria of these jobs. This will clearly help bridge the socioeconomic digital divide of the rich and the poor, but there are major obstacles to overcome, as mentioned in a Flexibility Ltd article online :

• “can poorer people pay market-rate access charges, or will there be a continuing requirement for public subsidy?
• will initiatives (e.g. learning centres, community portals etc) survive when public funding runs out at the end of projects?
• will people who do develop their skills have to migrate out of the area to find work?
• can the new infrastructure being developed be used to bring work in to disadvantaged areas?”

Are there any benefits to the Digital Divide?

Due to the fact that internet technology is not evenly distributed around the world and as a result, there is the issue of the digital divide.Developing countries have the opportunity to access internet technology whereas developing countries do not have information technology facilities which deprive them from development success and knowledge of society and economy.Countries with awareness of information computer technology are able to obtain advanced education and are able to develop the skills required in order to access present and oncoming technology.  If the two types of world citizens were provided with the equal opportunity of access to information computer technology There remains the stark disparity between two types of world citizens: one empowered by access to information and communication technologies (ICT) to improve their own livelihood; the other stunted and disenfranchised by the lack of access to ICT that provide critical development opportunities.  Indeed, those developing countries which fail to keep up with the accelerating pace of IT innovation may not have the opportunity to participate fully in the information society and economy. This is particularly so where the existing gaps in terms of basic economic and social infrastructures, such as electricity, telecommunications and education, deter the diffusion of IT.

Digital Divide = Educational Divide = Urgent Action Needed

Digital Native is a common term used to describe those who have been brought up during the digitalage of technology, and are therefore more familiar with computers and the Internet. It is widely thought that our young children are Digital Natives, however, in low socio-economic areas, the term Digital Native is often a myth. While students in higher decile schools will more often than not have access to an internet enabled device, this is not the case for students in low-decile schools (Hartnett, 2016).There is no doubt that digital technology is changing every aspect of life from how we communicate to the way we learn. In the age of technological ubiquity, digital expertise is now considered an essential life skill (Hartnett, 2016). Technology is in fact changing the way we view schools, teaching and learning.Unfortunately a by-product of the digital age is the “digital divide”. The OECD define the “digital divide” as the gap between individuals, households, businesses and geographic areas at different socio-economic levels with regard both to their opportunities to access information and communication technologies (ICTs) and to their use of the Internet for a wide variety of activities. The socio-economic group a young person belongs to is influential in determining where they sit on the digital spectrum. Young people from lower socio-economic groups are less likely to have their own internet accessible device (Harnett, 2016). In the digital information age those who are either unable to access the Internet through the application of Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) are increasingly disadvantaged in their access to information (Cullen, 2001). The digital divide causes a major inequality that has very substantial drag to our educational performance

What about the digital divide in education?

We can’t assume that Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) is affordable for everyone. And we must not assume that all of our students have access to the internet at home. In fact, in the town of Kawerau where I work, only approximately 50% of houses are connected to the internet.So where does that leave us as educators? My last post on ‘How technology has changed my teaching philosophy‘ outlined how I believe that in this day and age, learning needs to be accessed anytime, anywhere and at any pace. We have also recently included this in our school’s e-learning vision. But it’s all well and good to say this if we were a BYOD school. Our community is not in the position where we can be BYOD. However, our school is nearly at the stage where we have enough shared Chromebooks that each student has access to one when they need it (when they are at school). But this in itself is problematic. The question that needs to be raised in this scenario is: If students are at school learning in a high-tech environment, yet they go home to no devices and no internet connection, do they perceive that their learning at school does not reflect what happens in their real world? What’s more is that in such a scenario, we are kidding ourselves if we want to achieve our vision of learning anywhere, anytime and at any pace.

If we want to give our students the same opportunities as those schools that have BYOD initiatives, or those students that have access to the internet and devices at home, then we need to think outside the box. In communities such as Kawerau, there needs to be a close link between the schools and the community. We cannot sit around and wait for our community to catch up with the digital age. With this in mind, I have been inspired by what the Manaiakalini Trust has achieved in similar communities in East Tamaki, Auckland. We are now on a journey to provide a similar setup in Kawerau and some surrounding areas. We are looking to set up our own trust with the vision of providing all of the students in our area with access to a device, as well as access to the internet at home for that device. Every student would use this device to learn both at school and at home. We aim to achieve this with funding so we can enable our students to own a device over a two-year rent to own programme at a low cost. We also need to ensure that our community is connected to the internet. To achieve this, we aim to have multiple access points throughout the town, all of which bounce off the UFB connections from the schools within the community. Only those devices that are part of the programme will be able to access this UFB connection