2009
DOI: 10.1080/01972240802587539
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Digital Divide: A Discursive Move Away from the Real Inequities

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
29
0
2

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 64 publications
(33 citation statements)
references
References 22 publications
0
29
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…It is a challenge to solve a problem you cannot define, and the inconsistency of definitions has affected policy-making processes that attempt to address these issues. One caveat-this article focuses on definitions and policies in the United States, but it is important to note that different nations have taken differing definitions of and approaches to digital divides, digital literacy, and inclusion (Barzilai-Nahon 2006;Craven 2011;Dolan and Kahn 2011;Harle and Tarrant 2011;Meneses and Momino 2010;Salvador, Rojas, and Susinos 2010;Stevenson 2009). A review of this literature suggests two conclusions.…”
Section: Definitions Of Termsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…It is a challenge to solve a problem you cannot define, and the inconsistency of definitions has affected policy-making processes that attempt to address these issues. One caveat-this article focuses on definitions and policies in the United States, but it is important to note that different nations have taken differing definitions of and approaches to digital divides, digital literacy, and inclusion (Barzilai-Nahon 2006;Craven 2011;Dolan and Kahn 2011;Harle and Tarrant 2011;Meneses and Momino 2010;Salvador, Rojas, and Susinos 2010;Stevenson 2009). A review of this literature suggests two conclusions.…”
Section: Definitions Of Termsmentioning
confidence: 95%
“…For example, the NTIA reports released by the Bush Administration (i.e., those from 2000 onward) began to paint a rosy picture of a closing divide, with much government research during this time period lessening its focus on quite substantial remaining inequalities (Bertot 2003). Stevenson (2009) has criticized the entire Falling Through the Net series (USDC 1995;, as well as the 2002 A Nation Online report (USDC 2002; for framing the policy debate around the digital divide as a problem of access rather than one of class struggle related to economic modes of production, arguing that the government's depiction of the digital divide as an individual rather than a social problem served as a vehicle for claiming the divide had closed "as more and more Americans purchased computers" (Stevenson 2009, 11). Warschauer (2003) also criticizes the digital divide concept for ignoring broader social problems with too narrow a focus on improving access, arguing that technology use is as important as technology access: Technology does not exist as an external variable to be injected from the outside to bring about certain results.…”
Section: Criticism Of the Digital Divide Conceptmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The digital divide can be viewed as a function of labor conditions in the knowledge economy, not just the level of access to technology (Stevenson 2009). As Liu (1996) noted:…”
Section: Access Is Not Equitymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Inequalities in access to the internet have been perceived as the most important dimensions of the digital divide by policy makers and academics alike, despite counter arguments highlighting the significance of deeper social inequalities (Kvasny & Keil, 2006;Mossberger, Tolbert, & Stansbury, 2003;Servon, 2002;Stevenson, 2009). As a result, projects aiming at the provision of cheaper or free access to the internet have been popular policy approaches in many countries (for analysis of these projects, see Bar & Park, 2006;Kvasny & Keil, 2006;Strover, 2005;Yildiz, Kaya Bensghir, & Cankaya, 2005).…”
Section: Policies and Projects Emphasizing Access To Ictsmentioning
confidence: 98%