Reader Response 1 (World wakes up to digital divide)

Wakefield (2010) observed that sources from International Telecommunications Union (ITU) ranked countries based on internet connectivity, where the more economically developed countries were the most connected. Reports from New America Foundations (NAF) also showed that the internet usage of a nation was not proportionately represented as the rural areas tend to have lesser internet access and usage. Thus, the less developed countries in Europe tried to increase their countries' access to internet by providing Wi-Fi infrastructure to their suburban villages. This helped some villagers to improve their lives socially, economically and culturally.

 

Although I lived in a highly economically developed nation with advanced technology, I acknowledged the fact that life could never be equal for everyone.  However, Wakefield seemed to neglect this part of the 'reality' when she remarked that broadband connectivity would improve the lives of people if they could use it effectively. Standing in the shoes of a poor and uneducated villager who lived in the rural area of an economically less developed country, I felt that technology might not be the most influential factor that would improve the lives of such members of the society. I would not deny the fact that technology and internet were a crucial element that brought prosperity to my country and improved the quality of life of many Singaporeans. Yet, such degree of effective improvement in standards of living was not applicable to everyone in my society and in all parts of the world.

According to Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs (Maslow, 1943), 'needs' had different degrees and layers. However, the basic needs for survival, such as food and housing, were not affordable to the poor in the less developed countries. Hence, for these poor, technology might be one of the irrelevant luxurious 'wants' that created an even heavier financial burden to their lives. In fact, the article itself reported that those Native Americans who lived in the 'barren desert' have to pay more for the Wi-Fi access. In addition, the internet also might provide these less privileged ones with information that would not help to improve their standards of living directly and effectively. This was mainly due to the fact that some of these technologies were too costly for them to afford and use in their daily lives.



Such situations were not only relevant in less developed countries; they also surfaced in highly developed countries, like Singapore and America. In these countries, income disparity was a serious problem in the society. In Singapore, despite the high Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita, many poor families still struggled with their basic needs. However, the Singapore government did not let this group of people to cope with the unaffordable advancing technology themselves or provide them with Wi-Fi connection which was too 'sophisticated' for them to comprehend. First of all, the government-subsidized  housing, education and healthcare services were given for the survival of these less privileged members of the society. After these subsidies were given, the people would be educated on the usage of such technology. The young would learn in their educational institutions while the elderly could be educated on how to operate the computer in classes provided in Community Centres (CC).

Though such system was not perfect in allowing all citizens to have an access to the technology, it showed that the authority had taken note of the priority of needs and wants of the people. Although the access to technology and internet might not be at the top of the list for the less privileged members of the society, I agreed with Wakefield’s view about the positive impact of effective usage of internet. This was probably why the government had implemented those programmes in Singapore to ensure the poor would not be left out in terms technological benefit after their basic needs have been well taken care of.  All in all, I believed that effective usage of technology would improve the lives of people in varying degrees, but it might not be the most essential and useful factor to increase the standards of living of the people, especially for the less privileged members of the society.

 

References:

Wakefield, J. (2010, March 19). World wakes up to digital divide. Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/8568681.stm

Maslow, A.H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review 50 (4) 370–96. Retrieved from http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Maslow/motivation.htm