Revista Mexicana de Estudios Canadienses (nueva época) Asociación Mexicana de Estudios sobre Canadá, A.C. [email protected] ISSN (Versión impresa): 1405-8251 MÉXICO 2008 Martin R. Dowding THE DIGITAL DIVIDE: CANADA’S ACCESS AS A 97 NEO-LIBERAL COMMODITY Revista Mexicana de Estudios Canadienses (nueva época), primavera-verano, número 015 Asociación Mexicana de Estudios sobre Canadá, A.C. Culiacán, México pp. 97-110 Red de Revistas Científicas de América Latina y el Caribe, España y Portugal Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México http://redalyc.uaemex.mx THE DIGITAL DIVIDE: CANADA’S A CCESS AS A NEO-LIBERAL COMMODITY MARTIN R. DOWDING Abstract The term “Digital Divide” has had and continues to have many different definitions, depending on who is observing the problem, where they are observing the problem, and who is provid- ing the definition. Neo-liberal economic analysts prefer to limit the problem to ICTS as a market- value commodity driven by technological determinism, seeing profitable manufacture, highly concentrated sales, and high adoption rates as a way to overcome the “divide.” Educators and literacy specialists, on the other hand, prefer a broader interpretation, which includes the universal use-value of ICTS in the creation of a better-educated society in which citizens can contribute more than their taxes. This paper defines several “divides” and recognizes existing 97 and long-standing alternatives which might overcome the divides. Key words: Digital divide, connectivity, Canada, universal access. THE FIRST WAVE AND COMMODITY-VALUE espite promises of universal access, the Digital Divide is a persistent Dphenomenon in the increasing dominance of Information and Communica- tion Technology (ICT). In the mid 1990s, during the “first-wave” of what was then called the Information Highway, the Canadian Liberal government’s re- sponse largely resembled the U.S. government’s analysis of deployment and use, leading to the recognition of the Digital Divide. Following the U.S. policy model, the Liberal government considered access to ICTs in terms of neo-liberal com- modity-values in a globalized, deregulated telecommunications market driven by a variety of free-trade agreements at the bi-national and international level. Although both the U.S. and Canadian governments acknowledged a social aspect to ICTs in their early documentation of the ICT experiment, they fundamentally saw the process as an economic issue, designed to blossom in the hands of the private sector, in the process of creating a post-industrial information economy (Bell, 1999). Deploying such a new and massive technological infrastructure meant leveraging huge amounts of money and resources from the public and RMEC / núm. 15 / primavera-verano / 2008 REVISTA MEXICANA DE ESTUDIOS CANADIENSES private sectors, comparable to the way Canada linked “nation-building” with the creation of the railroad in the 19th century. To some optimists the first wave of ICT deployment was seen as delivering Marshall MacLuhan’s Global Village (1964-2003) in a convenient package (Wright, 1990). In an effort to guarantee that Canada be “the most connected country in the world” (in the Speech from the Throne in 1997; Canada: Privy Council Office, 1997), the Liberal government developed a policy for National Information Infrastructure. The government developed policies and practices regarding “e-government,” and also created the nation-wide Community Access Program, the “cornerstone” of the Liberals’ Connecting Canadians Initiative. Although Canada is considered one of the richest and most “just” countries (MacQueen, 2006), the government’s optimism about guaranteeing universal access to information through ICTs is now in jeopardy of never being truly real- ized. The most recent threat to universal access is a result of the current Conser- vative government’s decision in 2006 to diminish support for the National Infor- mation Infrastructure it inherited from the previous Liberal government. The Conservative government’s focus, although promoting e-government, has cut support for a number of vital programs that promote universal access. Instead, 98 the Conservatives are concentrating on high-profile wars against drugs, crime, and terrorism in Canada and abroad, rather than guaranteeing equitable, sus- tained access to a dynamic communication infrastructure as a public good vital to health, education, and welfare. DIGITAL DIVIDE: A DEFINITION The term “Digital Divide” was in general use by the late 1990s and was intro- duced by the U.S. Department of Commerce (National Telecommunication In- formation Administration –NTIA) in its Falling Through the Net series in 1995. The term has been almost universally adopted since then. But more than 10 years after the first deployment efforts, deciding “who” is “divided” from (de- grees of) “what” and “where” they have access to information has not yet been adequately answered. According to the Liberal Canadian government during the late 1990s, income level and who had what technology at home were the pri- mary ways of determining who had access to ICTs (Statistics Canada: Annual Home Internet Use Survey). That posed a limited analytical problem, according to Vanda Rideout (2000). The Internet User Survey didn’t ask about where else, other than at home, Canadians were accessing ICTs until at least four years later. For the reasons above, the current Conservatives government’s ICT policy should continue to interrogate the Digital Divide. The Conservatives should THE DIGITAL DIVIDE: CANADA’S ACCESS AS A NEO-LIBERAL COMMODITY decide what the term Digital Divide means to them today, in light of their “e- government” efforts and neo-liberal market ideology. Defining the Divide can only be fully addressed if the government acknowledges that it signifies different things to different stakeholders and that there is a depth and a breadth to connec- tivity. For example, the foremost issue remains the possibilities of connectivity for people at different economic levels, often determined by different education levels, or where they live (urban or rural areas), and what their information needs are. This paper reports a brief history of Canadian government connectivity pro- grams. The paper also reviews the parallel NGO and public interest groups that sprang up to critique the Canadian Government’s ICT deployment policies. In spite of the public interest groups’ critiques, governments have never responded with enough financial or technical support to overcome the Divide. We should be concerned about the Digital Divide because it limits some citizens’ awareness of their rights and responsibilities due to shifts to online e-government and “i- government” (or government by information). DIGITAL DIVIDE AND CONNECTIVITY: THE FIRST WAVE (IHAC 1994-1997) 99 During the first wave of defining universal digital connectivity in the 1990s the Canadian government championed the “Information Highway” as the paramount communication medium at a time of telecommunications de-regulation and market transformation. This was no less problematic than re-defining telephonic uni- versality in 1910.1 As new media converged (computers, TV, radio, VCR, cell phones, etc.), and begat a new global information economy, the “first wave” of neo-liberal Governmental responses to identifying the Digital Divide emerged. Those first and dominant policy responses were problematic in that they identi- fied the adoption, or “penetration,” of ICTs in the same way Government econo- mists viewed the adoption of any less sophisticated stand-alone household com- modity such as TV or radio (Sciadas, 2001). In response public interest groups, formed by frequently un-funded or under-funded citizens, academics, and infor- mation professionals, began to present their argument to the Government that universal access to ICTs has the potential to transform society by giving all citi- zens access to information and decision-making powers. THE LIBERAL POLICY LEGACY (1994-1997) The default definition of the first-wave Digital Divide in federal Canadian policy documents under the Liberal government between 1994 and 1997 primarily REVISTA MEXICANA DE ESTUDIOS CANADIENSES addressed “sustainable competition” and “market linkage,” despite optimistic references to “content and culture,” “access and social impacts,” “learning and training” (Canada: Industry Canada, 1995). The body responsible for setting the ICT agenda during the 1990s, the Information Highway Advisory Council (IHAC), under the auspices of Industry Canada, first distributed funding in 1994 for public-access digital connectivity through the Community Access Program (CAP), described on the CAP website in the following way: Community Access Program (CAP) is a Government of Canada initiative, adminis- tered by Industry Canada, which aims to provide Canadians with affordable public access to the Internet and the skills they need to use it effectively. With the com- bined efforts of the federal, provincial and territorial governments, community groups, social agencies, libraries, schools, volunteer groups and the business com- munity, CAP helps Canadians, wherever they live, take advantage of emerging op- portunities in the new global knowledge-based economy. Under CAP, public loca- tions like schools, libraries and community centres act as “on-ramps” to the Infor- mation Highway, and provide computer support and training. The program plays a crucial role in bridging the digital divide; contributing to the foundation for electronic access to government