- From: Blossom Michaeloff <bmichaeloff@mindspring.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2004 08:40:30 -0600
- To: "EOWG (E-mail)" <w3c-wai-eo@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <5.1.0.14.0.20040122211603.00ac0858@pop.mindspring.com>
Hi, Shawn - I don't believe I can post directly to the EO list from my home computer, so could you post the following to the list? ... Subject: Social Factors I have doubts about using the term "digital divide" in Social Factors. It implies a black and white situation, whereas the reality is shades of grey. Please note the attached article from Scientific American, August 2003: "Demystifying the Digital Divide - The simple binary notion of technology haves and have-nots doesn't quite compute" by Mark Warschauer. Overview of the article: "The concept of a 'digital divide' separating those with access to computers and communications technology from those without is simplistic and can lead to well-meaning but incomplete attempts at a solution based on merely adding technology to a given circumstance. "In fact, people have widely varying opportunities for access to computers and communications technology and disparate reasons for wanting the level of access they may desire. "A consideration of how people can use computers and the Internet to further the process of social inclusion is paramount in any effort to install new technology into an environment lacking it." The original download from Scientific American's Web site is the PDF attachment. I've also attached a text version. Blossom
Attachments
- application/pdf attachment: digital_divide.pdf
- text/plain attachment: digital_divide.txt
- text/plain attachment: ATT00007.txt
Received on Friday, 23 January 2004 09:48:47 UTC