subject: Nature Of The Digital Divide [print this page] The 'Digital Divide' includes to the idea that differences in access to IT in turn have social consequences, in other words, anyone who has access to modern communication techniques, has improved social and economic development opportunities. The origin of the term "digital divide" is controversial. A date for the first mention of the term may be attempted by clarifying the mailing list of the "Digital Divide Network" set in about the year 1994. Further efforts to clarify the concept of this resource had to be broken off. In fact, the term Digital Gap was already used by Bill Clinton in the second half of the 1990s.
The nature of the Digital Divide and the question of when it is closed depends on the chosen definitions. Of these, there are almost as many authors as what often ends up in contradictions. Based on the theory of diffusion through social networks, a conceptual framework can be established, which measures the different definitions, etc.
All types of studies and projects for the digital divide can be classified into four categories according to these questions: WHO, with WHAT features, is linked with WHAT for a technology, and HOW. WHO may include individuals, communities, organizations, societies, regions, etc. With WHAT features includes income, education, geography, age, gender, type of ownership, size, profitability, industry, etc. With WHAT technology includes telephony, Internet, computers, digital TV, etc. HOW linked includes only access, use, active pedagogy and process integration, etc. This results in a matrix with four dimensions, while each dimension consists of several variables. Each additional variable increases exponentially, the combinatorial complexity of this four-dimensional matrix.
For example, with only three different types of study subjects (individuals, organizations, or countries), each with 4 different characteristics (age, wealth, geography, sector), 3 different levels of access (access, use, active pedagogy), and 6 types of technologies (landline telephone, mobile phone, computer, digital television, Internet, broadband, with a certain speed), there are already (3 4 3 6) = 216 different definitions of the digital divide. Each of these is equally justified and depends solely on the goal that the user follows the definition.
Given this broad spectrum of possible definitions, it is liable to not be valuable in practice for "the" definition of the digital divide. The desired definition depends on context, and especially on the desired impact and the desired end use of the technology. Suppposing the definition of the digital divide is in practice always normatively aligned on the desired effect: depending on the desired effect, WHO, with WHAT characteristics should be combined with WHAT technology which attracts the best HOW.
The term Digital Divide is applied both to the differences between population groups within a society, as well as in terms of the differences between industrialized countries and developing countries. The term Digital Divide is also a reference to the so-called knowledge gap.
The discussion of this term must be associated with the theory, increasingly represented since the 1990s, seen after heading to the general development of an Information or Knowledge Society, in which the possibility to access and control these technologies to a large extent will be dependent on the personal success of a person.
