
There Is No Digital Divide - llambda
http://www.technologyreview.com/blog/mimssbits/27888/?p1=blogs
======
japhyr
This seems like an attempt by a journalist to write off a complex problem
because it does not reduce to something simple.

As a high school teacher, I see a clear difference between students who have
internet access at home, and students who don't. I see a difference between
students who have guidance at home in how to use the internet appropriately,
and those who don't.

Students who have access and guidance at home spend their online time at
school focused on learning. Technology is a tool for their learning. Students
who don't have access or guidance at home spend their time in school learning
about the technology, rather than using the technology to serve their learning
needs. Students who don't have access at home also spend a lot of time trying
to avoid learning and use facebook/ youtube etc.

The "digital divide" concept is messy, but it is real.

~~~
crusso
Right, there's a divide there.

But the salient point I've seen raised is that the problem isn't so much
access. It's the guidance or other motivation to use the access that's the
problem.

Access without the proper guidance/motivation is just another way to destroy
the productivity of the people who can least afford to lose any.

It's like the lottery problem. The people who can least afford the disposable
income that should allow for engaging in such a statistically unlikely reward
are the ones who far and away spend the most on it. The lottery increases the
prosperity gap in this country, and the very institution that should be
decreasing that gap (the government) acts to increase it.

Is free access of net benefit or detriment? I think we should put assumptions
aside and evaluate that question carefully. Once the government takes action,
it rarely pulls back -- even in the face of overwhelming evidence that it's
doing more harm than good. That's because the momentum of government action
produces too much money and power for the people in charge.

------
officemonkey
There may or may not be a digital divide, but the Times article provides a lot
of evidence that there still remains a parenting divide. Those children with
engaged caring parents have a better chance than those with clueless parents.

Now, what happens if you have caring engaged parents and NO
computers/internet/smartphone/technology at home? Well, just ask anyone over
45.

~~~
ctdonath
Bingo. It was people _without_ Internet access who _built it from scratch_.

As I add to abuckaplate.blogspot.com, I'm struck by the incongruous fact that
our poor's greatest malady is _obesity_. Uncomfortable to say: the problem the
poor face isn't, on the whole, access to XYZ (food, data, etc.) - it's doing
something sensible with it.

------
mistermann
Rather than a rebuttal, that article was almost entirely devoid of any actual
content.

~~~
batista
My sentiments exactly. More like a hazy academic working in the fashionable
"gender studies" field wanting to promote her work.

Plus the way the journalist that put up the piece found her (not because she
was suggested as the best in the field or anything, but because she tweeted
about the article), well, ...

------
quadlock
200 million should be spent on teaching critical thinking then they would be
able to recognize 'cloaked' sites and other bullsh*t

------
batista
> _"So, for example, some of the work I do is with homeless LGBT youth, most
> of whom are Black or Latina/o. These young people are struggling with some
> big life challenges, and they are - like other people their age - completely
> wired. My research finds that Black/Latina/o LGBT youth who are homeless -
> in other words, the very people who should be on the "other side" of so-
> called the "digital divide," are in fact, quite adept at technology and most
> have smart phones._

Besides her argumentation being too hazy and hand-wavy for my taste, I don't
think extrapolating from a tiny (but fashionable in academia) minority of the
poor (LGBT homeless youth?), can give us any real insights about the digital
divide. (It can give us a pretty good idea about the way the academic world
works in human sciences, though).

Try going in MS, AL, SD, MI etc to study the vast masses of poor people
instead of focusing on some insignificant in the grand scheme of things
subgroup (urban + young + LGBT + Black/Hispanic, how more narrow can you
get?), that not only can be a real outlier, but it also doesn't define what
being poor is.

~~~
hammock
I work in this area and I have seen the best data available on connectedness
(rigorous surveys where n=30,000). The old poor are disconnected. But the
young poor are overwhelmingly connected. No one in "our" world would ever
suspect it, but they are using facebook, sharing videos and photos, texting,
using apps, etc etc at a MUCH greater rate than the typical lameass white guy
that you think of when you think tech geek.

And in today's US where one out of every two babies born is a minority, a
disproportionate number of whom are poor, looking at trends within these
demographics is more important than ever.

