Tuesday, March 5, 2019
The Problem And Proposed Solutions
The digital break debate encompasses issues that be of social, scotch and policy- qualification import. Meaning to say, the issues regarding the digital divide, as a phenomenon and as a current concern that take to be addressed, is not nevertheless bound to the issue of the existing disagreement in terms of access to engine room which transverses different sectors of society. This paper attempts to prep be the digital divide, the debate and the foundational issues concerning the phenomenon/problem.In line with the main task of this paper is the denomination of the dickens most of the essence(predicate) obstacles that need to be overcome and the two important things that the giving medication needs to create in dealing with the digital divide. In meeting the demands of a worldwide economy, technical advancements especially in the field of telecommunications and information technology argon key factors in making possible various transactions faster, cheaper, more reli co mpetent and convenient. Needless to say, these expert advances are important tools if companies and other business ventures are to survive in the digital economy.These technological advancements however, are evolving far too fast which then generate pressing problems that ought to be considered. On a preliminary note, the said(prenominal) rapid technological evolution poses serious questions if our societal structures can speedily hold to these changes and more importantly, if we, ourselves can rapidly adapt and be able to integrate for ourselves these changes. A good example is the cyberspace and the online participation and it is to this division that we shall now turn.A fuller understanding of the digital divide phenomenon necessitates an understanding of its underpinnings. As Pippa Norris contends, the digital divide is understood as a multidimensional phenomenon encompass three distinct aspects (Norris). These three distinct aspects according to Norris are the global d ivide, social divide and democratic divide, respectively. Norris elucidates provided, The global divide refers to divergence of network access between industrialized and developing societies.The social divide concerns the banquet between the information rich and poor in each nation. And lastly, within the online companionship, the democratic divide signifies the difference between those who do, and do not, use the panoply of digital resources to engage, mobilize and come in in public life (Norris). One whitethorn thus infer that these three aspects related to the issue of access to the net income involve not classic social, merely also economic and political conside symmetryns.In an article entitled, What is the Digital Divide, Harouna Ba makes a similar point as Norris. Ba writes, lack of access to networked technology will result in a substantial segment of society having neither the skills nor the delegacy to participate in the progressively more knowledge-based U. S. economy (Ba). As Ba contends, in that respect is a felt need to address the issue of access on with the social, economic and political considerations that it entails. At this point, the emphasis is on what Norris calls disfavor communities.As mentioned earlier, these communities lack not merely access but also and more importantly, the undeniable skills and the means to participate in the digital world. Ba identifies a numeral of obstacles in dealing with the digital divide phenomenon/problem. But, as I image it, in relation to the issue of access, the two most important obstacles in dealing with the digital divide are the issues of the disadvantaged communities not having the skills that are necessary and their lack of the means that are necessary.These two are barriers to technological access. One may thus infer that the issue of access only(prenominal) becomes a legitimate issue because of these two obstacles. Again, it is not merely a matter of providing the communities with a greater access to computers and the Internet by sound the cost of the hardware and software that hardware and software companies manufacture and handle in the market nor is it merely a matter of increasing the ratio of computers to students in our schools and other institutions of learning.This will not solve the digital divide. The resolution to the problem lies on our capability to the address the needs of the disadvantaged communities. thither is a need for intervention, so to speak. The government has a significant eccentric in addressing these needs. However, the governments intervention will not suffice. in that respect is a need for a multi-sectoral cooperation in addressing the needs of disadvantaged communities. A crucial question comes into the scenario. What needs to be done?As Ba sees it, what is needed is to develop community-based technology programs that will support the needs of disadvantaged communities. Ba writes, Community technology access models are often grounded on community needs and encompass multiple goals to strengthen neighborhoods, educate youth, rear economic development, connect individuals to the social and economic life of the community, and increase confederation in civil society (Ba). It is of utmost importance that we first appreciate the needs of the community so that we may provide the appropriate solutions.Furthermore, it is important that technology programs be based on the needs of disadvantaged communities so that these communities themselves may have the opportunity to identify and thereby, integrate what the vital functions of technology are to them and the opportunities that it can provide for them. Such an integration entails that a disadvantaged community sees the relevance of technology in their lives. It may thus be inferred that for Ba, the digital divide may be addressed by batch empowerment.Our concerted efforts must be directed to empowering the disadvantaged sectors of society. How can this be done? People empowerment is make possible through community education. As Ba contends, there is a lot of work to be done especially in the areas of learning and teaching with and/or approximately advanced technologies in informal settings for under-served communities (Ba). This is one of the main reason wherefore government initiatives and interventions in the past only had a limited triumph in dealing with the digital divide phenomenon.There indeed are initiatives and interventions but they do not address the problem. They miss the point, so to speak. As Ba notes, state governments attempt to address the digital divide via two government agencies the Public Utility Commission (PUC) and the Department of Education. The PUC by appealing to telecommunication companies and the likes for universal service and the Department of Education by making victual for computers in school for those students that do not have access to a computer and the Internet at home.These attempts miss th e point because they have been made on the unfounded boldness that the digital divide issue is merely an issue of access and thus, can be solved by making computers and the Internet more accessible to individuals. But what can these initiatives and interventions accomplish if in the first place, the problem is that individuals from disadvantaged sectors of society lack the necessary skills and the means to be able to access and thereby, utilize technology? The plain the true of the matter is that technology evolves much faster than society can adapt to it.Furthermore, why limit the provisions with the students? Why not youth in general? Why exclude out-of-school youth? This merely shows that the limited success of state initiatives and interventions may be explained by the fact that their assumption is unfounded and that their digital divide programs are not grounded on community needs and thus, ineffective. The digital divide phenomenon/problem is not merely a problem of access. The preceding discussion makes it clear that it is not a mere matter of identifying the have from the have not.Even this distinction is grounded on further distinctions in terms of the social, economic and the political. These further distinctions albeit different from each other, are very closely interrelated that they all affect changes in the others. homophile society is complex. It is not simply a social system. It is also a political system and every political system is also an economic system. The human mind too is complex. There are countless possibilities in terms of scientific and technological advancements. Science and technology evolves too fast.In stemma to science and technology, our societal structures and institutions do not. They do not because there are many other significant things to consider. Perhaps, this is the predicament of our time. Works Cited Ba, Harouna. What Is Digital Divide. August 20 2007. . Norris, Pippa. Digital Divide Civic Engagement, Informatio n Poverty, and the Internet Worldwide (Communication, Society and Politics). Cambridge Cambridge University Press, 2001.