March 2009 Archives

Ofcom (Office of Communication), the independent organization which regulates the UK's broadcasting, telecommunications and wireless communications sectors, recently released their Citizens' Digital Particiataion Research Report, an in-depth review of how well e-government fares.

According to their findings: "People do not necessarily identify their actions as 'citizen participation', but when we asked them about specific activities, it became apparent that most of them are, in fact, participating as citizens. The most significant variables that influence levels of participation among the general population sample are socio-economic group, qualifications and age, although internet access and confidence are also important.

"Citizen Participation, both online and offline, was highest among our online user sample. This is partly due to this group's characteristics (e.g. a higher socio-economic group) but also because, as confident online users, they can carry out more citizen participation activities via the internet.

"The internet is an important channel for citizen participation, and even more so for related citizen activities. Those with the internet at home displayed higher levels of citizen participation in all groups surveyed, including those living in areas of multiple deprivation.

"The internet makes citizen participation easier. This is partly because it saves time, which is one of the main reported barriers to participation, and it seems that the internet is both supplementing and replacing traditional channels for citizen participation. But this may mean that a proportion of the population may become disenfranchised as digital citizen participation and other online related citizen activity grows."

"Those living in areas of multiple deprivation generally engage less in citizen participation activities compared to the general population. The main reported barrier to this group's participation is lack of interest, but internet access, lack of awareness, trust and confidence are also barriers to online participation. Those with internet access at home in areas of multiple deprivation exhibit greater levels of citizen participation than those without access. However, people living in areas of multiple deprivation are less likely to know what can be done online, and more likely to question the effectiveness of digital participation [my emphasis]."

In fact, according to a current iWire article, Ed Richards, head of Ofcom, recently told a meeting at the London School of Economics that 40 percent of homes in the UK do not have access to broadband and half them didn't want it even though they could afford it. Whether self-excluded or not, 20 percent of Brits could be left behind by e-government.

The research report correctly highlights the apparent widening gap of the U.K. digital divide. Though not in fact widening, the existing gap appears to widen when viewed against the backdrop of increasing government use of the Internet as a tool and channel of citizen services.

As the report puts it: "While these new [Internet] channels may raise levels of engagement, they also pose a challenge: a significant section of the population, lacking access to these technologies or the confidence to use them, may become increasingly disengaged [my emphasis].

According to the report, 90% of the general population sample have 'ever' taken part in some sort of citizen participation activity and three-quarters (75%) have done so in the past year. In addition, around two-thirds have 'ever' taken part in more than two activities and almost one-third have taken part in more than two activities in the past year.

Further, online users are more likely to engage in citizen participation activities and to participate more frequently. This fact is put down both to the type of people in the online user sample and to the channel itself--in the sample there is broad agreement that the internet has made citizen participation easier.

Also, those in the online user sample tended to be from higher socio-economic groups and have higher levels of qualifications, which match the profile of people who tend to participate more in citizen participation activities.

However, Internet access and confidence with its use are not the only variables. Middle-aged people, those from higher socio-economic groups and those with higher levels of qualifications are more likely to take part and participate more frequently than are the general population. Conversely, young people, those from lower socio-economic groups, and those with fewer qualifications are less likely to take part, and participate less frequently than the general population.

This report goes in to great detail (and I highly recommend that you give it a closer look) of Internet impact on citizen participation, and serves--in my view, anyway--as a great example of that kind of study that perhaps the FCC should carry out and publish.

Tuesday March 17, 2009 saw the last print edition of the venerable Seattle Post-Intelligencer, long the second Seattle paper, keeping The Seattle Times honest.

And then there was only one.

Seattle has now joined the cities that in recent times have retired one of their two major papers. Denver's Rocky Mountain News closed its doors last month, as did Albuquerque's Tribune.

The Seattle Post-Intelligencer is set to survive, however, in its digital incarnation as seattlepi.com.

According to reports, the digital paper will retain 20 of the paper's 150 strong staff, while also adding 20 sales reps to the online ads department.

Interestingly, any current Seattle P-I paper subscribers will automatically be switched to The Seattle Times, unless they make a fuss about it.

According to the seattlepi.com execs, the digital version is having a re-birth as of today, Wednesday. And an interesting one it is. All eyes probably will not be on seattlepi.com and their future financials and balance sheets, but they should be. For here is a paper that--albeit not by choice--has closed its analog doors and opened, widely, its digital ones.

Can it survive? Will it survive?

I believe it can (and without wasting trees). Whether it will survive, I believe comes down to--you've heard it before--content. If its content is good, and original enough to keep its current, and garner additional, readership, I believe it will survive. Perhaps on advertising revenue alone.

And if not; I, for one, would pay a subscription fee for an original, aggressive, insightful, well-written and relevant local paper. To me, $10 a month would be well worth it. Taking its current readership (those on the right side of the digital divide) of 146,000 that's close to $1,5 Million in monthly subscription fees. Any digital paper can boom on such revenue flow.

Then the question does become, how good do you have to be as a paper to command those $10 a month? Well, that's the question, isn't it?

I must confess I no longer lease a landline from the phone company. I get excellent cellular reception where I live in Coeur d'Alene, Idaho--so far, I have not missed a call.

And, I'm not alone. According to a Nielsen Company News Release, more than 20 million U.S. telephone households (that's 17 percent, folks) are wireless substitutors--i.e., homes without landlines that rely solely on a mobile phone for their home telecommunications.

The Baby Bells are of course well aware of this and are scrambling for stakes in the cellular markets (unless they already own most of it).

Which made me think about how phone companies now approach developing nations. Do they pull thousands of miles of copper or fiber? No. They implement cellular networks, bypassing the whole landline scenario--that 100 year step in telecom evolution.

A similar bypass of an--albeit not as long--evolutionary step is being facilitated by the netbook (Internet Notebook).

According to United Nation data, between seventy and eighty percent of any given western population own or use computers. Leaving, twenty to thirty percent who do not. The percentages of non-users are of course much higher in the developing world.

Cost has long been held up as one of the reasons almost a third of a given western population still do not own or use a personal computer; which is where the netbook enters the fray.

At a current going rate of $250-$400, and with the $100 netbook within sight, especially considering that Freescale Semiconductor has now built a chipset that will enable netbooks to power 8.9-inch displays and run for eight hours at a cost of less of $200.

True, a netbook will not feature Microsoft's Office 2007, nor will it, as a rule, feature Windows Vista. Rather, it will depend almost exclusively on the internet for both communication (email) and applications (such as Google's office suite).

Some pundits hold that the $100 netbook is still two years away, but that is around the corner in my book.

At $100 per netbook, I see every child in every school (regardless of funding) with the tools to acquire the skills to survive in this techno-world. The same holds true of the developing nations, where governments can now begin to afford to educate their populations in computer skills.

And, at $100 per netbook, the computer is also now within reach of those twenty to thirty percent who so far has not had the means to bridge the hardware divide.

More to follow on this.

Megan Tady of Free Press recently published an in-depth analysis of the digital divide here in the United States in the form of a documentary series, including interviews, revealing the vital, social, and economic justice role that internet access plays.

This series of articles and interviews, named "Five Days on the Digital Dirt Road," can be read at InternetForEveryone.org (http://www.internetforeveryone.org/americaoffline/nc/intro) and could not be more recommended.

The interviews in particular show the effect of the divide on the lives of working Americans trying to make a living, while also providing the means for their children to educate themselves for a life in the 21st century.

Please set aside the twenty or so minutes it will take you to follow Megan around North Carolina to get a first hand view of the importance of the Internet, especially now that we are trying to lift ourselves out of the ever-stickier recession.