The Digital Divide: Fact of Fancy - Part I

It is intriguing, perhaps even frightening, to imagine what sort of a world it would be if there was no Internet, no email, no Google, no online shopping, dating, trading, online government and a host of other cyberspace services that many of us take for granted. Yet the revolution that was born when the first PCs started to talk to others and is now a veritable feast of global digital interaction, continues to be a famine for much of humanity. In this context Sub-Saharan Africa springs to mind, but not right next door. While not quite a famine, the issue of the ‘digital divide’, for those who don’t have access to the Internet, exists closer to home, as born out by the pronouncements and programmes of leading world figures from business and government alike.Take for example, Gallup’s CEO, Michael Fleischer’s indictment that ‘the Internet is so pervasive that not having access to the technology or not knowing how to use it will be the equivalent of not knowing how to read or write’.

President Clinton was clearly listening when in 1999 he issued an executive memorandum making closing the digital divide a primary goal of Federal Government. He also announced the ‘Digital Opportunity’ programme with accompanying budget requests of $2 billion in tax incentives to encourage the private sector to make computer donations and $380 million for public private partnerships. European leadership has been no less committed to resolving the problem as evidenced by the EU initiative e-Europe, the implementation of which would represent an information society for all, including an overall social vision where there is place for users and Government online.

There have been such a lot of pronouncements, speeches, programmes and money invested in resolving the issue that a great debate has ensued about it involving business and academic leadership across the globe.

The ‘digital divide’ is formally defined as the gap that exists between those with and those without access to the Internet, (i.e. the digital ‘haves’ and ‘have nots’). The main protagonists of the debate are split broadly into two groups, the technology ‘optimists’ and the technology ‘pessimists’. Conventional wisdom is represented by the ‘optimists’ view that the divide is caused by barriers to Internet connectivity such as low levels of education, income and technology proliferation. The pessimists disagree and hold that deeper societal issues are at the root of the problem and that the significant government funds being used to address these barriers predicated on an ‘optimistic’ mindset, are misdirected. Given the entities and huge sums of money involved, the ramifications of this debate are serious and global in dimension and anything which furthers understanding of the issues involved, should prove valuable for all concerned.

An opportunity to cast more light on the issue, from a British perspective, exists in the shape of the Isle of Man (IOM), which, while largely independent from the UK, is very similar to it. The island has the advantage of a relatively prosperous and highly educated population and an approach to technology which renders it something of an ‘Internet Island’. Logic therefore, if the ‘optimists’ are right, dictates that the island should have comparable, if not better levels of Internet connectivity than the rest of these islands.

This blog submission will assess whether the optimistic or the pessimistic side of the debate is closer to the truth. It is based on a survey of the IOM generally and in particular their e-Government programmes, as well as a review of literature on the digital divide spanning over sixty publications.

The outcome of the assessment could constitute a dilemma for many Governments and others, in wondering if the significant monies being spent on e-Government and the challenge of the digital divide qualifies as wise investment or optimistic folly.

Read 4 comments


It is partly true and partly false that in sub saharan Africa there is a famine concerning the the availability and use of the internet. I know of an example where a lecturer who had been given a laptop computer by the government, in a bid to reduce the seemingly internet famine in Ghana(West Africa), because he is a father and needs to provide for his family's daily expenses, he sold the laptop compter and used the money to engage in private bussiness. So sometimes these funds by donor agencies are indeed misapplied. These issues also have social dimentions.
I think that the access to the Internet is just part of general trends in Information Access that help perpetuate poverty. For example, most people don't think much about the fact that the ability to navigate a web browser and type are tied to use of the Internet--and these are directly connected to literacy, education and other related issues. Frankly, we have to stop looking at the Internet the Technology as an item of discussion. We need to look at it as just one more aspect of American culture now. This is akin to looking at the automobile as a novelty, which people 100 years ago did. When we can look past the technology and to the core socioeconomic problems, then we really solve things. Otherwise, we just end up making laws to give the digitial equivalent of autos to cattle farmers, with the same short-term comic results and long-term ineffectualness.
Lest we get all bent out of shape thinking about what it must be like to not have access to the internet, let's recall that just twenty years ago, most of us had no access to the internet - and life went on. We survived quite well, not at all aware of our terrible lack of connectivity. Let us accept that any new technology is going to be adopted first by some people, then later by others. There was once a "TV divide", only the wealthy had televisions. Same for telephones. Now, these are ubiquitous. Let's not make a problem out of a simple fact of nature - technology does not descend like manna from heaven to every possible beneficiary. The wealthiest pay higher prices to be early adopters; they pay for the improvements which reduce prices and make technology affordable to larger and larger slices of the population. A dramatic example is the electronic calculator - once costing $400 for primitive models, now so cheap that they are given away.
Is the digital gap for real?specially, when internet usage has become so common even in developed countries.

Do ou think seasonalities play a major role in internet usage..

read my blog about retail ..and seasonalities effect..

Leave a Comment

Connect to this blog to be notified of new entries.
You are not logged in.
Sign In to post unmoderated comments.
Join the community to create your free profile today.
Keyword Tags:  thegap   google   digitaldivide   academicleadership   famine   committed   intriguing   digitalinteraction   digitalopportunity   globaldigital   privatepartnerships   euinitiative   budgetrequests   executivememorandum   michaelfleischer   computerdonations   socialvision   ceomich

Receive the latest blog posts:
Share Your Perspective


TRUSTe Privacy Certification