Thinking About Community Technology and
the Digital Divide
Why computer
access is an important topic
November 30, 2000
Author: Josh Senyak &
Albert Fong
Editor's Note:
Albert Fong
and Josh
Senyak work with nonprofits and technology
while defending their 4 children (2 each) and
themselves from too much technology. Josh is a
philosopher subverted by technology while Albert
is a technologist subverted by philosophy.
|
There's a
bittersweet pleasure in watching the media love the
Digital Divide halfway to death. Five years ago, the
problem didn't even have a name. Today it's discussed
everywhere, from pool halls to the White House.
Everybody knows that whites, Asians, the wealthy and
educated are far more likely to use information
technology than are blacks, Latinos, the poor, those
living in inner cities or rural areas. Everybody knows
that the gap is unfair, serious, and growing.
It's good to see that the issue has finally won
household recognition and some powerful new friends. But
we're concerned that not enough people are asking a
fundamental question about the Digital Divide. Why
are we so concerned about poor kids' access to computers
when they don't even have basic necessities of life?
We know that wealth, housing, health care, decent
education and good jobs are divided just as
disproportionately between "haves" and "have-nots."
Given these desperate gaps, what makes computer access
anything more than a luxury?
Is it because
technology access opens the door to education, jobs, and
all the other good things in life? Technology vendors
certainly appreciate that point of view. It makes good
copy for politicians, too. President Clinton, in his
recent "National Call to Action" on the Digital Divide,
declared: "If we work together to close the digital
divide, technology can be the greatest equalizing force
our society or any other has ever known." Well-meaning
enthusiasts envision a promised land of "digital
opportunity." Thanks to the Internet,
they say, every homegrown business can compete
head-to-head with the corporate giants. Children of
migrant workers can access the same information as their
country-club counterparts. Discrimination will
eventually evaporate, banished by the magic of the network.
Technology, according to the deathless cliché, levels
the playing field.
Not quite. As it turns out, the best computer
access in the world won't get you into Stanford if you
can't read and write. And while thousands of programming
positions are available on-line, they'll probably go to
somebody else if you don't have the resources to set up
your childcare, a decent suit of clothes, and a ride to
the interview. Technology really hasn't changed the
fundamental rules of the game very much. All the
handicaps in the race continue to favor the "haves." The
real barriers to opportunity--language,
education, literacy, poverty, discrimination--are left
untouched. The Digital Divide is real, but it's hardly
the most serious divide for Americans seeking a better
life for themselves and their families. Our best weapon
against the Digital Divide is recognizing it as merely
the bleeding edge of a much deeper, much more serious
gap in opportunities and privilege.
Technology,
by itself, will never erase gaps in wealth or
opportunity. On the contrary. New technologies can be
expected to concentrate wealth rather than equalize it.
By illustration, the years 1983 through 1995 saw an
explosion of PCs and the rise of the Web. They also
witnessed a remarkable 17% growth of inflation-adjusted
net wealth for America's richest one percent... while
the equivalent wealth of America's bottom two fifths
plunged by 80%. These figures are somewhat hard
to reconcile with the warm glow of opportunity conjured
up by Silicon Valley's cheerleaders.
If
computers don't provide a royal road out of poverty,
does the Digital Divide really matter after all? We
believe that it does-but not because of anything
radical, revolutionary or "smart" about the wired world.
Once the exciting hype is set aside, computer technology
is revealed as a pretty ordinary, prosaic set of tools.
And this, in our opinion, is exactly why
computers and the Internet must be available to all,
regardless of ethnicity or geography or income. Not
because the technology is somehow special or
revolutionary, but exactly because it's so
ordinary. Nobody expects the ordinary, familiar
features of our national infrastructure--public
libraries, telephones, highways, public transportation,
immunizations or post offices--to end poverty or to
bestow social and economic equity. They're just simple,
basic tools for living in the modern world. Everybody
should have them. That's why they're important, and
that's why they deserve public funding. We believe that
the same applies to access to computers and the
Internet.
So it doesn't matter, finally, whether
everyone in America eventually owns a home computer and
DSL
line. What does matter is that all people have
some way to access and use information technology, if
and when needed, to meet the ordinary demands of life:
to write a resume, buy a ticket, get a good price on a
car purchase, send a note, look up street directions. Access
to technology then looks something like public access to
libraries, recreation centers, and parks. It won't
change the world. But it is one more factor that
contributes to a community's overall quality of life.
Over the past five years, we've had the good
fortune to work with a talented, creative, outspoken
group of colleagues developing community technology
centers (CTCs) in California and throughout the US.
These centers serve an amazing range of people on the
wrong side of the Digital Divide, giving them technology
access, training, and support. As we've come to see it,
the role of technology in the CTC is exemplified by
three guiding principles:
- Program comes first. Hardware,
software
and data
lines are just the skeleton of technology access. In
fact, these "hard costs" are quickly dwarfed by the
investments needed for educational programs and staff.
Access isn't complete until there are programs and
staff in place to help people learn how to use the
technology and how to apply it to their everyday
pursuits: jobs, education, services, health, financial
planning, consumer information, personal interests and
creativity.
- Fight the hype. Marketers use tremendously
sophisticated advertising techniques to sell
technology as an exciting, bewildering mystery.
Ordinary consumers need the tools to break through the
mystery-to understand how technology works, what it
can (and cannot) do for them and for their
communities. Access centers should encourage their
users to tear computers down and build them back up,
to experiment and improvise. In fact, many centers
forbid their users from "passive consumption" of
technology, such as simple game-playing or random
web-surfing. Users are shown instead how to create
their own websites, how to create and modify digital
images, how to program their own applications.
- Match the technology to the need. CTCs
can't afford a lot of support costs and their users
can't afford a lot of down time. Thus the level of
technology should be no more sophisticated than needed
(and no less!) to achieve the center's explicit
programmatic goals. There's usually somebody hanging
around the CTC who is very fond of the wires and the
toys. That person shouldn't be left alone to design
the network.
The CTC has proven its merit
on the ground. If it doesn't fill in the Digital Divide,
at least it functions as a tough and serviceable rope bridge
over the gap. We've learned that CTC-style access can be
delivered in low-income communities for as little as $50
per person per year. The CTC model clearly generates
intense excitement, interest and sense of ownership
within the communities it serves.
After half a
century of digital exploration, our society is more
plagued than ever by social and economic division.
Despite best efforts and intentions, the playing field
is not level. Through no fault of their own,
millions of children are faced with vastly restricted
opportunities for personal and professional growth and
fulfillment. Information technology is not a simple
answer to this problem. People aren't poor because they
lack access to the Internet. They lack access because
they're poor. But, to the extent that access to
technology can make a difference, the CTC is a concrete
and effective solution.
Of the many inequities
we must address
as a society, this may be one that we can actually fix.
"The authors thank their colleagues on the
Computers In Our Future (CIOF) Coordination Team and the
eleven CIOF CTC's for sharing their insights,
experiences and patience over four years of hard work.
As they well know, we had our share of errors and
omissions then and accept fault for those that may have
crept in to this article."
|
