Soma effects of the Digital Divide at the global level
Some Effects of the Digital
Divide at the Global Level
Most people in the non-Western world do not
have Internet access. Those in many develop-
ing countries who are fortunate to have Internet
access often are required to deal with technical
problems involving poor connectivity and low
bandwidth. Consider, for example, some of the
challenges faced by Internet users in Malawi,
given the current state of telecommunications
in that African nation. Levison, Thies, and Ar-
marasinghe (2002) point out that people living
in this developing country must contend with a
very expensive form of telephone service (and
corresponding Internet access) that is metered in
terms of minutes used. Not only is Internet ac-
cess prohibitively expensive in Malawi, but also
those who can afford access must cope with many
practical diffculties and limitations. For example,
telephone connections there are so slow and tele-
com failures so frequent that using the Internet
for conventional purposes (e.g., for interactive
searches that most Internet users residing in North
America and Western Europe take for granted as
part of a Web interface) is generally impractical.
The kinds of problems experienced by Internet
users in Malawi should not be viewed as isolated
or as peculiar to countries in sub-Saharan Africa.
Rather, they are typical of those encountered by
users in many developing nations.
Efforts to address problems involving the ICT
divide between industrialized and developing
countries can be traced back to the early 1990s,
when the idea of a Global Information Infrastruc-
ture (GII) emerged. Al Gore described the initial
plan for a GII in an address to the International
Telecommunication Union in Brazil on March 21,
1994. A principle objective of Gore’s plan was to
develop a global infrastructure that would support
universal access to ICT. Critics argue that very
little has resulted from this and other earlier pro-
posals aimed at addressing global concerns about
unequal access to ICT. Recently, however, there
have been signs suggesting that concerns about a
global digital divide are being taken seriously. In
the summer of 2000, for example, the Okinawa
Charter on Global Information was announced at
an annual Group of Eight (G8) summit in Japan.
At that summit, the G8 leaders formed the Digital
Opportunities Task Force (DOT), which some
see as a frst step in a serious effort to narrow
the global digital divide or what some now refer
to as the international information and knowl-
edge divide. Leslie Regan Shade (2002) refers to
“globalizing from below” in describing the way
women in the Philippines, Latin America, Africa,
and Asia have developed grass roots initiatives
for democracy and social justice. At the second
global knowledge conference in Malaysia in 2000,
there were two initiatives introduced: a gender and
ICT replication and learning fund that promotes
an exchange of initiatives on gender equity and
women’s empowerment using ICT; and support to
women entrepreneurs, which provides incentives
either through ICT businesses, online mentoring,
or fnancing (Shade, 2002).
Online Communities, Democratic Ideals, and the Digital Divide
In an article titled “Equity of Access: Adap-
tive Technology,” (Grodzinsky, 2000), the author
addressed the problems faced by users with dis-
abilities. She argued that in the age of information
technology, the computer equipped with adaptive
devices can be the equalizer that allows people
with disabilities to participate in and compete
for jobs that require computer access, because it
supports autonomous learning and empowers the
user. Since the publication of that article, there
have been several advances in assistive devices
and interface design that address disability issues.
There is now a disability setting, for example,
in the Windows Control Panel. Sun Systems (a
computer company) has developed an accessibil-
ity program and in March 2001, “the American
Foundation for the Blind cited the achievements
of Sun’s Accessibility Team, recognizing Sun with
the 2001 Access Award. The Java Accessibility
API provides a complete and consistent interface
that makes it easy for mainstream developers and
for assistive technology vendors to make fully
accessible applications available to users with
disabilities” (Sun, 2001). For those with vision
impairments, Sun’s products are compatible with
a number of specialized assistive technologies,
including freeware and open source solutions.
Gnome 2.0 provides software to make the desktop
user-accessible and customizable.
While these technologies have moved in the
right direction, accessibility on the Web has re-
mained a problem. Since the mid-1990s, the world
of Internet computing has expanded signifcantly.
With the advent of e-commerce, shopping has
moved online, and library access and research
are now available through large online databases
and accessed through search engines. Web sites
invite us into their domains with applications that
include movie clips, animations, hyperlinks, and
shopping carts. But are these applications acces-
sible to all? How useful is the movie clip to the
hearing impaired user? Can the blind user fnd the
hyperlink to get to the next page of a Web site?
Given that the infrastructure of the informa-
tion age is the Internet, why aren’t all Web sites
accessible to everyone? The World Wide Web
Consortium (W3C) has a Web Accessibility Ini-
tiative (WAI) whose technical activity section is
dedicated to ensuring that the core technologies
of the Web are accessible to those with disabilities
(World Wide Web Consortium). Then why haven’t
Web designers taken advantage of the free exper-
tise and built their sites to be accessible to those
with disabilities? There are several issues: a lack
of mandate for the private sector, cost, speed, and
sensitivity to the problem of accessibility for the
disabled. Because Section 508 of the Americans
with Disabilities Act only applies to organizations
receiving government funds, those in the private
sector can ignore the mandate on accessibility.
But even universities that receive federal mon-
ies have been slow to make their sites accessible
to disabled persons. In terms of cost, it is more
expensive to create a Web site with a multimodal
interface. Developers have to become familiar
with accessibility issues and how to overcome
them. It takes longer to develop these Web sites,
because it is often diffcult to translate into ac-
cessible code all the bells and whistles that make
a Web site interesting. Sometimes, these must be
limited as a developer builds in text redundancy
so that accessibility can be realized. Also, some
companies perceive that these Web sites generally
are larger and take longer to load, which translates
into a speed issue. In general, this is not the case.
Given the current processor speeds, network
capabilities, and memory capacity of personal
computers, we must ask if these are real issues
or simply excuses. Slowly but surely, computer
developers are recognizing that users with dis-
abilities form a viable international community
that has joined the professional ranks of not only
computer programmers, engineers, and scientists,
but also computer users with purchasing power.
Online Communities, Democratic Ideals, and the Digital Divide
CONCLUSION
Assuming that the digital divide can be bridged
at both the local and global levels, important
questions still remain. One question has to do
with whether increased online communities at the
global level threaten our traditional community
life, especially as it exists in the off-line world. Phi-
losopher Hans Jonas (1984) speaks of “neighbor
ethics.” Traditionally, we have had a presumptive
responsibility to consider our neighbors as people
deserving special moral consideration. Histori-
cally, we have banded together with our neigh-
bors in the face of external threats, and we have
enjoyed and benefted from the mutual support
and reciprocal relationships with our neighbors in
physical communities. But who are our neighbors
in the global community? If we band together in
online communities comprised of people living
on several different continents, we can offer our
“electronic neighbors” support in some sense and
to some degree. But, in so doing, do we also risk
the possibility that we will lessen our commitment
to our neighbors in physical space? If so, we can
ask whether this tradeoff is one worth accepting
or is one that needs to be reevaluated
SÃO PAULO (SP)- Um consumidor encontrou um anfíbio dentro de uma lata de pêssego em calda na segunda-feira (27), em Florianópolis(SC). "Abri a lata e consumi normalmente. Em seguida, quando minha mulher foi pegar uma porção, ela percebeu que o bicho estava entre os pêssegos em calda", afirma Davi André Lopes de Souza. 
