Remember back when television sets in the home first became popular, it took a while for the technology to diffuse until nearly every home in the country had one. During this time you were either the family that owned a TV or the one that didn’t. Similarly, the internet is technology still dispersing around the country though issues of diffusion may not be as simple as the ‘have’s and ‘have-not’s’.
The advent of the internet has sparked all manner of associated guidelines and rules to regulate its use. The Association for Progressive Communications established the Internet Rights Charter which states the internet should be accessible by all. The charter suggests “The right to communicate is a fundamental human right. Rights related to access and use of the Internet and electronic communication infrastructure are equally fundamental if ordinary people are to have their voices heard.” (Association for Progressive Communications, 2006). This premise makes it imperative that equal access and diffusion of the internet occur among all citizens. However, in 2002 only a little over 50% of Australia’s population was using the internet (Willis & Tranter, 2002). Hardly all encompassing. Willis and Tranter (2002) suggest during 2001 a time of rapid rate of adoption was passing and diffusion represented on the sigmoid shaped timeline was tapering off. It can be imagined this slight downward trend in diffusion by 2012 has created a persistent divide in internet adoption.
Slow uptake in the last decade has focused academic research on the divide of uptake between regional and non-regional areas. Research supports that adoption rates in rural regions are lower than metropolitan areas, especially in indigenous communities. In 2002, 57.9 non-indigenous people had accessed the internet in the preceding 12 months, compared to only 30.4 percent of indigenous people (Radoll, 2006). Also, internet use in a home environment, which has educational and social benefits outside the work domain, was lower in regional areas. Only 9.1 per cent of remote communities used the internet at home whilst 40.2 per cent of usage was at home for non-remote areas (Radoll, 2006). With access seen as the barrier to higher diffusion rates its reasonable to understand the Australian Governments implementation of the National Broadband Network (NBN). The policy aims to connect 93 per cent of households to broadband and use wireless and satellites to cater for the rest (Hewett, 2010). With speeds expected at 100 mega bits per a second, arguably superfluous for household usage, the NBN is estimated to cost $43 billion to implement (Hewett, 2010). If access was the only barrier to diffusion, subsequently closing the gap of inequality, this plan may be justified but geography may not be the only influencing factor.
The complex nature of new technology means diffusion not only requires gaining the technology but learning new skills to use it and actual ongoing use of the technology. Gibson (2003) says a ‘city-country divide’ is too simple a notion to analyse internet use. Though Australia is a large land mass our population is primarily massed around cities. In 1998, 63% of Australia's households were located in capital cities (Arnold, 2010). Arguably, by now internet diffusion rates should be higher given greater access in metropolitan areas so others factors must be at play. A report by NATSEM (as cited in Arnold, 2010) argues that “low-income earners, the unemployed and the elderly have not even connected to the net. If you are poor or lack good education it is not going to make much difference how many satellites we put in the sky or how many cables we run past your house.” Thus, income and age could be affecting internet use regardless of access. Holloway (2002) believes that initiatives like the NBN solve issues of supply but there relativity undocumented issues on the demand side that are affecting internet diffusion. One such factor could be education. The Australia Bureau of Statistics data showed a direct correlation between higher education levels and increased internet usage (Radoll, 2006). Arnold (2010) suggests the characteristics of high volume users are young, male and earning in excess of $75,000. Age as a demand barrier to internet usage may to reasonably influential given Australia’s aging population. Whilst more research is needed into socio-demographic barriers to internet diffusion it is clear that access in not the only factor creating a digital divide.
Pre-existing social conditions are reflected in the diffusion of the internet so a ‘divide’ due to remoteness is not an accurate representation of a greatly complex issue. The NBN may slightly increase the uptake of the internet but ongoing usage and diffusion in metropolitan areas requires policy that speaks to more intricate factors. A corporate initiative dealing with the socio-demographic factors of the internet is Telstra’s Connected Seniors program. The Gold Coast’s Jazz Radio advertises this ‘tech time’ for seniors offering weekly sessions designed to teach the elderly in the community how to use new technology so they are not left behind. On a national scale, until census data on the impact of the NBN (if indeed it continues to be implemented) is available, its effectiveness remains to be seen.
Reference list
Arnold, B. (2010). Digital Divides in Australia. Retrieved from http://www.caslon.com.au/dividesprofile6.htm
Association for Progressive Communications. (2006). APC Internet Rights Charter: Internet for Social Justice and Sustainable Development. Retrieved from http://www.apc.org/en/system/files/APC_charter_EN_0.pdf
Gibson, C. (2003). Digital Divides in New South Wales: a research note on socio-spatial inequality using 2001 Census data on computer and Internet technology. Australian Geographer, 34 (2). Retrieved April 2, 2012, from Ebsco Megafile Complete.
Hewett, J. (2010, August 12). Broadband’s digital divide. The Australian. Retrieved from http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/features/broadbands-digital-divide/story-e6frg6z6-1225904628003
Holloway, D. (2002). Disparities in Internet Access: A Case Study of the Digital Divide in Western Sydney. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 37 (1). Retrieved April 2, 2012, from Ebsco Megafile Complete.
Radoll, P. (2006). Australia’s Digital Divide: Chapter 16: Information and Communication Technology. Retrieved from http://epress.anu.edu.au/caepr_series/no_26/mobile_devices/ch16s03.html
Willis, S., & Tranter, B. (2002). Beyond the ‘digital divide’: Socio-Economic Dimensions of Internet Diffusion in Australia. Retrieved from http://www.sisr.net/events/docs/0208willis.pdf
No comments:
Post a Comment