Nice thread. I agree 100% with Sam Lamfranco in his last post.
Even the so-called "digital divide" is becoming a contested term and a "struggle for interpretation" is useful as it reveals ideological underpinnings of the different proponents (at least most of the time). (In any case, I think it is about time that people and institutions do examine their ideological underpinnings when they talk about trying to help bridge the "digital divide".) Recent debates about the relevance statistical indicators of the "digital divide" illustrates another facet of the emerging this term (fast becoming an "ideological hatstand", i.e., a term which EVERYONE hangs their hat on!). For example: is teledensity an appropriate measure of the DD--i.e., therefore, "phones for all"? Are "PC penetration rates" a useful indicator when community access, or even multiple home users in a single PC prevalent in Asian households? How can one actually measure *relevant* internet access, when majority of urban youths in Asia log on to the WWW simply for network gaming? These I think are not easy questions, but can be starting points for a more relevant discussion, even prior to costs. What is really important IMHO is how disadvantaged communities appropriate ICTs and the Internet to overcome socio-economic divides and power differentials in their localities, countries, and in the whole globe. Al Alegre ------------ ***GKD is an initiative of the Global Knowledge Partnership*** To post a message, send it to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe gkd OR type: unsubscribe gkd Archives of previous GKD messages can be found at: <http://www.globalknowledge.org>
