Many
of you will be familiar with the concept of the digital divide,
the idea that the world is split between those who have access to new
information technologies and those who don't. After the initial enthusiasm
which people felt for the equalising tendencies of the web and email,
a critical backlash emerged in which journalists and academics argued
that far from empowering the poorest of the poor, the web was exacerbating
pre-existing differences in access to learning and information, and
re-enforcing exploitative relationships. The poor remained poor and
illiterate, the argument goes, and the well-educated just became web
literate. Of course, this has happened in plenty of places, and I would
argue that rather than a digital divide we are experiencing a digital
continuum.
However,
no technologies in history have ever helped the destitute before they
helped the middle class. What's new about new digital technologies is
that they are breaking down the distances between the middle classes
of different countries. When you phone a customer service number in
the UK, there's a high chance your call will be routed to India; and
I know Indian computer engineers who live in Delhi but work (virtually)
in London and New York. Academics, journalists and students in Nepal
suddenly have access to a reliable form of international communication
(email) which is cheaper and faster than their corrupt postal service.
The uptake of email among university faculty in India in Nepal, when
it finally came, was far faster than in the UK. Why? The benefits are
so transparent to them. Likewise, whole archives of online information,
previously unimaginable for schools and universities without strong
libraries, are now available over the web. Certain academics are getting
worried, however, because video conferencing and online libraries are
threatening the one perk of academic existence: conference trips to
scenic locations.
