Demystifying the Digital Divide Author(s): Mark Warschauer Source: Scientific American, Vol. 289, No. 2 (AUGUST 2003), pp. 42-47 Published by: Scientific American, a division of Nature America, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/26060401 Accessed: 05-06-2018 13:38 UTC REFERENCES Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article: http://www.jstor.org/stable/26060401?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at http://about.jstor.org/terms Scientific American, a division of Nature America, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Scientific American This content downloaded from 129.252.86.83 on Tue, 05 Jun 2018 13:38:29 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms By Mark Warschauer Demystifying Digitalthe Divide The simple binary notion of technology haves and have-nots doesn’t quite compute For much of the past decade, policy leaders and social scientists have grown increasingly concerned about a so- cietal split between those with and those without access to computers and the In- ternet. The U.S. National Telecommuni- cations and Information Ad- ministration popularized a term for this situation in the mid-1990s: the “digital di- vide.” The phrase soon became used in an international context as well, to describe the status of information technology from country to country. TOM DRAPER DESIGN 42 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN AUGUST 2003 This content downloadedCOPYRIGHT from 2003 129.252.86.83 SCIENTIFIC on AMERICAN, Tue, 05 Jun INC.2018 13:38:29 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms LEFT TO RIGHT: NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, DAVID GREEDY, PHOTODISC, PHOTODISC (top row); PHOTODISC (all photographs in second row); PHOTODISC, PHOTODISC, MARK WARSCHAUER (third row); PHOTODISC, PHOTODISC, KEITH DANNEMILLER Corbis/SABA ( fourth row); KEITH DANNEMILLER Corbis/SABA, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, PHOTODISC, PHOTODISC (fifth row); PHOTODISC, PHOTODISC, VIVIAN MOOS Corbis (bottom row) This content downloadedCOPYRIGHT from 2003 129.252.86.83 SCIENTIFIC on AMERICAN,Tue, 05 Jun 2018INC. 13:38:29 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms Underlying disparities are real, both the ‘digital divide’ framing is that it tends broader health and education campaigns within and among countries. The Benton to connote ‘digital solutions,’” that is, around the world.) Foundation, which promotes the public- “computers and telecommunications,” This perspective is known in academ- interest use of communications technolo- without a consideration of the context ic circles as technological determinism, gy, reports that by late 2001, 80 percent into which that hardware would be put. the idea that the mere presence of tech- of American families with annual house- This line of reasoning led some to as- nology leads to familiar and standard ap- hold income greater than $75,000 were sume that the dearth of digital access of plications of that technology, which in online, compared with 25 percent of the nations, communities and individuals turn bring about social change. The Har- poorest U.S. families. Total home Inter- could be easily tackled by an infusion of vard Graduate School of Education’s net access was 55 percent for whites, 31 computers and Internet connections. For- Christopher Dede has termed this the percent for African-Americans and 32 mer Speaker of the U.S. House of Repre- “fire” model, with its implication that a percent for Hispanics. Looking at the in- sentatives Newt Gingrich has talked computer, by its mere presence, will gen- ternational picture, in most African coun- about the virtues of giving every child a erate learning or development, just as a tries less than 1 percent of the population laptop computer, without offering a sol- fire generates warmth. Governments, the is online. Not surprisingly, such dispari- id plan for using the devices. And Bill private sector, foundations and charities Some assumed that the dearth of digital access could be easily tackled by an infusion of computers. ty correlates highly with other measures Gates donated computers to small-town have thus spent hundreds of millions of of social and economic inequality. libraries across America, believing that dollars to bridge the perceived digital di- Yet the simple binary description of a Internet connections would help stem the vide by providing computers and Inter- divide fails to do justice to the complex exodus from rural areas. Although Inter- net lines to those in need, often without reality of various people’s differing access net connection through small-town li- sufficient attention to the social contexts and usage of digital technology. An braries has improved people’s lives by al- in which these technologies might be American who surfs the Internet on a lowing them to stay in touch with friends used. (Dede notes that a better model computer at a local library once a month and relatives, it has not stemmed the ex- than fire might be clothing, which also might be considered to be a digital “have- odus—which largely depends on broad- keeps one warm yet is tailored for indi- not,” whereas someone in a developing er factors, such as employment availabil- vidual fit and use.) country with the same profile would be a ity—and may even have contributed to it How does this application based on “have.” Indeed, couching the condition by allowing people to search for jobs in the assumption of technological deter- in black-and-white terminology can lead cities. (To Gates’s and Gingrich’s credit, minism turn out in practice? Over the those attempting to deal with technolog- they at least had the issue of technology past few years, I have traveled around the ical inequities down the wrong path. The access on their radar screens. Gates, rec- world to study community technology late Rob Kling, who directed the Center ognizing the limitations of computer programs in both developed and devel- for Social Informatics at Indiana Univer- technology in solving social ills, has since oping countries. I have observed scores of sity, put it well: “[The] big problem with gone on to donate billions of dollars to diverse programs and have interviewed hundreds of participants and organizers. As the following case studies show, two Overview/Technologic Logic basics became apparent: well-intentioned ■ The concept of a “digital divide” separating those with access to computers and programs often lead in unexpected direc- communications technology from those without is simplistic and can lead to tions, and the worst failures occur when well-meaning but incomplete attempts at a solution based on merely adding people attempt to address complex social technology to a given circumstance. problems with a narrow focus on provi- ■ In fact, people have widely varying opportunities for access to computers and sion of equipment. communications technology and disparate reasons for wanting the level of access they may desire. A Minimalist Approach ■ A consideration of how people can use computers and the Internet to further the IN 1999 THE MUNICIPAL govern- process of social inclusion is paramount in any effort to install new technology ment of New Delhi, in collaboration with into an environment lacking it. an Indian company called the National Institute of Information Technology, 44 SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN AUGUST 2003 This content downloadedCOPYRIGHT from 2003 129.252.86.83 SCIENTIFIC on AMERICAN, Tue, 05 Jun INC.2018 13:38:29 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms work is suffering.” In short, the commu- nity came to realize that minimally inva- sive education was, in practice, minimal- ly effective education. Nevertheless, an overemphasis on hardware with scant attention paid to the pedagogical and curricular frameworks that shape how the computers are used is common in educational technology proj- ects throughout the world. But such tech- nological determinism has been chal- lenged in the academic arena by a con- cept called social informatics, which argues that technology must be consid- ered within a specific context that in- cludes hardware, software, support re- sources, infrastructure, as well as people in various roles and relationships with one another and with other elements of NEW DELHI CHILDREN experiment with what is literally a hole-in-the-wall computer in 2000. The the system. And the technology and so- minimally invasive education project was designed to insert technology into the environment so that the children would learn to use the computer without guidance. Without direction, however, the cial system continuously shape each oth- computer proved for the most part to be merely a high-tech toy. er, like a biological community and its environment. launched an experiment to provide com- difficult. Most poor communities in New Although grassroots teachers, parents puter access to children in one of the Delhi already have organizations that or aid workers may be unfamiliar with city’s poorest areas. Government officials work with children and that could have the academic term “social informatics,” and representatives of the company set set up educational training at a different many already appreciate the implications up an outdoor kiosk with several com- kind of computer center, but their par- of an interwoven relationship of technol- puter stations. The computers, with dial- ticipation was neither solicited nor wel- ogy and public organizations. Social in- up Internet access, were inside a locked comed.