Shireen Mitchell, "Access to Technology: Race, Gender, Class Bias" (Page 4 of 4)
The Road Ahead
The ongoing challenges with technology are many. For example, the
every-six-months schedule of upgrades for new-and-improved technology
tools makes it difficult for lower-income individuals to keep up.
Broadband companies are fighting over who should make broadband Internet
access available in areas that have low purchasing rates, which are
generally low-income communities. Digital cable companies have added
telephone, long distance, and broadband to their services. Telephone
companies are competing with wireless services, cable, satellite, and
Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) phone services. Currently,
recommendations for providing e-mail, video, camera, and other services
through cell phones are being made with the idea that this may impact
the issues of the digital divide. However, although most students
enrolled in my class have a cell phone, this doesn't allow them to
create, edit, or send a resume for a job.
Many people have little understanding of the impact these new
technologies have on low-income communities or minorities. On closer
look, instead of providing new opportunities for these communities,
they prove that the digital divide has not changed. The issues are still
the same. If the cell phone is counted as Internet access because of
text messaging, then we need to be clear that this is not the quality
access that enables families to survive in a knowledge-based economy.
With the appropriate connections, parents can work from home when their
children get sick and not lose pay. Text messaging, PDA's, or digital
cable don't allow access to post to a blog or to work with interactive
media components. Children can't get their homework done and projects
completed with text messaging. A mother can't take online classes after
her children are asleep without adequate access.
The focus on these other technologies also distracts us from the
bigger picture—building a diverse pool of technologically skilled
workers that helps to keep the United States competitive. Further, it
keeps us distracted from what is really going on in technology and with
the Internet, whose public face is currently white and, most of the
time, male. These distractions have come at a high cost to low-income
families, especially those headed by women. There are 30 million
"working poor" families—a number that almost exactly matches the 29
million families with zero online access. Just a coincidence?
Many of those women who have the chance to embrace technology are
able not only to improve their economic status and job security, but
also to influence public policy and dialogue by becoming bloggers,
Internet radio hosts, and content developers. This highlights the value
of access to technology for all women and indicates the
importance of getting women from various ethnicities and socioeconomic
backgrounds involved. These people are a part of the "invisible divide";
if such a large population is left behind, our economy can't continue to
grow. In order to close the gap, however, the root of the
access-to-technology bias must be dealt with in a more constructive and
beneficial manner. Without tackling the roots of the barriers to
technology access, the ultimate hope of technology—to create
opportunities for all, regardless of location, economic status, or
race—will be doomed to fail.
Endnotes
1. National Telecommunications and Information
Administration (NTIA), Falling Through the Net: Defining the Digital
Divide (United States Department of Commerce, 1999).
[Return to text]
2. NTIA, A Nation Online: How Americans Are
Expanding Their Use Of The Internet (2002); NTIA A Nation Online:
Entering the Broadband Age (2004).
[Return to text]
3. NTIA (2002).
[Return to text]
4. Deborah Fallows, How Women and Men Use the
Internet, Pew Internet & American Life Report (2005).
[Return to text]
5. NTIA (1999); NTIA (2002); NTIA (2004).
[Return to text]
|
