Encyclopedia of

Political Communication
Digital Divide

Contributors: Eva Johanna Schweitzer

Editors: Lynda Lee Kaid & Christina Holtz-Bacha
Book Title: Encyclopedia of Political Communication
Chapter Title: "Digital Divide"
Pub. Date: 2008
Access Date: December 25, 2015
Publishing Company: SAGE Publications, Inc.
City: Thousand Oaks
Print ISBN: 9781412917995
Online ISBN: 9781412953993
DOI: [Link]
Print pages: 187-188
 ©2008 SAGE Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This PDF has been generated from SAGE knowledge. Please note that the pagination
of the online version will vary from the pagination of the print book.
Dhaka University
©2008 SAGE Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved. SAGE knowledge

[Link]
The term digital divide describes the uneven distribution of information and
communication technologies (ICT) in society. This encompasses differences both in
access (first-level digital divide) and usage (secondlevel digital divide) of computers
and the Internet between (a) industrialized and developing countries (global divide), (b)
various socioeconomic groups in single nation-states (social divide), and (c) different
kinds of users with regard to their political engagement on the Web (democratic divide).
In general, these differences are believed to reinforce social inequalities and to cause a
persisting information or knowledge gap amid those people having access to and using
the new media (“haves”) and those people living without (“have-nots”).

A visitor looks at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology Media Lab initiative “One
Laptop per Child” at the United Nations Development Programme stand of the World
Summit on the Internet Society, November 18, 2005, at the Kram Palexo in Tunis.
The initiative is a partner in ITU's Connect the World Programme, which has been
developing a “one-hundreddollar laptop,” assisted by the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology Media Lab, led by Professor Nicholas Negroponte. The computers are
designed for use by schoolchildren in developing countries.

Source: AFP/Getty Images.

The metaphor of the digital divide became popular by the mid-1990s when the National
Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) of the U.S. Department
of Commerce (1995) first published its research report on Internet diffusion among
American citizens. Under the title “Falling Through the Net: A Survey of the ‘Have

Page 3 of 6 Encyclopedia of Political Communication: Digital

Divide
Dhaka University
©2008 SAGE Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved. SAGE knowledge

Nots’ in Rural and Urban America,” the results of this analysis revealed widespread
inequalities in national ICT access. Especially migrant or ethnic minority groups and
older, less affluent people living in rural areas with low educational attainments were
excluded from Internet services. This pattern was confirmed by follow-up surveys of the
NTIA which indicated also an initial gender gap in favor of men.

Although diffusion rates of the Internet were subsequently rising in all groups, additional
studies apart from those first policy reports proved a perpetuating digital divide both
in the United States and abroad. For the main part, these examinations were based
on secondary analyses of cross-sectional data with few panel exceptions and some
ethnographic projects in specific communities. Although varying methodologically
with regard to their units of analysis (e.g., individuals versus households), their
operationalizations of ICT access and usage (e.g., at home, at work, both, or in public
places), and their measurement of respective group differences (e.g., users/non-users
in absolute percentages versus odds ratios of adoption), the findings of these studies
suggested some common characteristics of the digital divide.

In single nation-states, access and usage of computer technology is stratified by age,

education, ethnicity/ race, family structure, gender, income, occupation, and place of
residence. In this way, young Western men with high qualification profiles, working in
well-paid managerial positions and living in small urban families with children are most
of all advantaged to adopt the new media. This applies both to the formal possession
of ICTs (material or physical access) and the [p. 187 ↓ ] motivation to deal with those
devices (motivational access) as well as to the experience and skills provided to use
the Internet (skills access) and the amount of self-administered time spent online for
specific purposes (usage access). Here, usage among advanced groups includes, in
particular, the proficient search for instrumental information on the Web to address
professional or political interests. On the contrary, lessadvantaged groups have been
shown to lack those basic navigation skills and to prefer entertainment or diversion
features on the Internet instead. Their political involvement has therefore not increased
with the rise of new information technologies.

On the global level, additional factors like state economy (measured in per capita gross
domestic product), international trade volume, degree of democratization, deregulation
of the telecommunications market, density of the communication infrastructure, and

Page 4 of 6 Encyclopedia of Political Communication: Digital

Divide
Dhaka University
©2008 SAGE Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved. SAGE knowledge

investments in research and development have also been found to influence Internet
diffusion. In this way, industrial societies are more prone to implement new technologies
than less-developed countries. Consequently, the current intensity of national ICT
access and usage decreases geographically starting from the United States and
Canada, Northern Europe, Australia, and New Zealand to Western Europe, Central and
Eastern Europe to Asia, Central and South America, and Africa.

In time comparison, this global digital divide remained relatively stable. Yet, in
single nation-states certain gaps in ICT access and usage have slowly begun to
fade: Especially among men and women and between rural and urban areas of
Western residences those early differences subsided, possibly due to extended
telecommunications networks, lowering entry barriers, and additional ICT experiences
at work. Other initial inequalities caused by factors such as age, education, ethnicity/
race, and income, however, continued to prevail.

These divergent developments and the various types of ICT access and usage
encountered in single countries led some researchers to criticize the original description
of a digital divide. In their opinion, this metaphor wrongly implies a binary construction
of “haves” and “have-nots” based on the simple notion of absolute and insurmountable
class differences in technology. Alternatively, they postulate “digital inequality” as
a gradual concept and therefore advocate multidimensional measures of Internet
connectedness which take into account the history and context of Internet use, its scope
and intensity, and finally the centrality of ICTs in people's lives.

Similarly, policy initiatives conducted by supranational organizations (e.g., European

Union, Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, and the United
Nations), national governments, and private enterprises or foundations have been
expanded to ameliorate the worldwide differences in ICT usage. Although concentrating
in the beginning on the mere improvement of technical access to computers and the
Internet in rural areas and public institutions (e.g., in libraries, schools, cultural centers,
and government facilities), recent projects also include civic information campaigns and
additional ICT courses for specific user groups to enhance media literacy in society.

Eva JohannaSchweitzer

Page 5 of 6 Encyclopedia of Political Communication: Digital

Divide
Dhaka University
©2008 SAGE Publications, Inc. All Rights Reserved. SAGE knowledge

[Link]
See also

• Diffusion of Innovations
• Information Society
• Information Technology in Politics
• Knowledge Gap
• World Wide Web, Political Uses

Further Readings

DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Celeste, C., & Shafer, S. (2004). Digital inequality: From
unequal access to differentiated use . In K. M. Neckerman (Ed.), Social inequality (pp.
355–400) . New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Jung, J.-Y., Qiu, J. L., Kim, Y.-C. Internet connectedness and inequality:
Beyond the “divide.” Communication Research 28 (4) (2001). 507–535 http://
[Link]/10.1177/009365001028004006

National Telecommunications and Information Administration . (1995). Falling through

the net: A survey of the “have nots” in rural and urban America . Washington, DC: U.S.
Department of Commerce.

Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the Internet
worldwide . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2005). The deepening divide: Inequality in the information society .
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage [Link]

Page 6 of 6 Encyclopedia of Political Communication: Digital

Divide