Advances in technology have revolutionized the ways we get our information and communicate with each other. Thanks to my iPhone, I have a constant stream of live news at my fingertips, I can instantly reply to emails on the go, and I can share photos with one tap of the screen. I use social media to form connections with potential employers and to develop a personal brand. Technology helps me feel connected to the many communities I've become part of, and I can't fathom a time when I knew how to live without my iPhone.
But some people do have to live without an iPhone, or a smartphone at all for that matter. When it comes to new technology, the issue of who has access raises some serious ethical dilemmas. All the functions of technology I've become reliant on in daily life are still unavailable to a significant portion of the population. Pew's latest data on mobile technology reveals that only 58 percent of Americans own a smartphone, and 10 percent don't own a cell phone at all. The ubiquity of iPhones on UNC's campus makes people who don't have smartphones seem like a tiny minority, but that doesn't mirror the broader American population.
Access to technology is not a luxury created equal, and I think it's something a lot of people can take for granted. Access to technology means access to more information, which means more power and influence.
A piece published by Santa Clara University's center for ethics lays out four conditions for information access:
1. Knowing that the information or information service is available.
2. Owning the equipment to connect to the information source.
3. Gaining access to the information service.
4. Knowing how to operate the necessary hardware and software (computer literacy).
In other words, even if every person in America was given a free smartphone, not everyone would know how to use it or be able to afford a plan to stay constantly connected to the internet. And some people may not even be aware of what kind of technological tools are out there. Access is about more than just possessing the hardware.
But what happens when only some people can afford access to new technology? It means those people get to reap its benefits, while the ones who can't afford it continue to fall farther behind the curve. This is the "technology gap." The people with access to the best technology tend to be more educated and wealthier, and the people with the least access tend to fall much lower on the socioeconomic scale. The people with access use tech to advance even higher in society, leveraging the available tools to build powerful networks and to stay informed. And owning most of the technology means having the most control over technology, so these people get to decide how it should be used and regulated, for better or for worse. People with less access are probably less likely to educate themselves over concerns like privacy, making them more vulnerable to exploitation by marketers and data-trackers when they do use it.
More and more people are getting access to smartphones, but a technological gap remains, and it has real implications for the socioeconomic gap. Technology provides infinite channels and opportunities. The people who can't afford to get their hands on it, or who don't know how to use it, will struggle to achieve upward mobility in a world where tech is becoming increasingly necessary.
It's a problem with no easy solution. While nobody can guarantee that everybody has a smartphone, there are some things we can do to alleviate the technology gap. We can work to maintain transparency and inform the public about their rights and risks online. We can shape the future of how our world is connected to the web. IT developers are coming up with new products and services right now to bring the web to everyone, and a range of interests are battling for control over that process. We can support the interests that will level the playing field instead of concentrating power into the hands of a few.
The ethical concerns surrounding access to technology are about much more than the technology itself, but rather how it's used and whose hands it's placed in.
No comments:
Post a Comment