« Previous post
Next post »

May 6, 2007

America: The Growing Digital Divide

Duncan Riley

33 comments »

pew.pngA new study (pdf) published by the Pew Internet & American Life Project has found that there is a growing digital divide across America.

John B. Horrigan’s analysis of America’s use of Web 2.0 and information and communications technology in the broader sense shows that whilst a reasonable number of Americans are embracing new technology and Web 2.0, a disturbing number are either not getting the message, or are choosing not to participate.

pew1.png

31% of Americans are considered to be “Elite Tech Users”, where as 49% have few tech assets, either engaging with the online world only on occasion, or not at all.

8% of people are considered to be “omnivores” which the study describes as being Web 2.0 devotes, highly engaged with video online and digital content; “creative participants in cyberspace”.

Is the switch off factor strictly a question of Age? The study found that the Top 8% are young, ethnically diverse, and mostly male (70%). The median age of the Top 8% is 28 with more than half of them under the age of 30. The bottom 15% was not surprisingly older, with a median age of 64 – and as a group reported the lowest levels of household income. And yet this group isn’t entirely switched off: 82% watch TV everyday and 76% have cable or satellite service, and collectively had the highest levels of watching TV or listening to radio of any group in the study; it’s just that there not using Web 2.0.

It would be easy to conclude that as an industry our message is not getting across as well it should be. Yet from such figures I’m actually drawn to the fact that such a high reported figure for those not engaging is an opportunity waiting to happen. There can be no market saturation until such time the 31% blows out to something closer to 100%.

As famously demonstrated with the Nintendo Wii, targeting a non-hardcore market can and does have its rewards.

 

 

  • Sphere It

This entry was posted on Sunday, May 6th, 2007 at 8:30 pm and is filed under Company & Product Profiles. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Trackbacks/Pings (Trackback URL)

  1. THE SAVVY BOOMER

    May 7th, 2007 at 9:12 am

  2. Geek And Poke

    May 7th, 2007 at 1:52 pm

  3. The Chronicle of YouGetIt.com » Blog Archive » Something For Everyone

    May 8th, 2007 at 2:50 pm

  4. Catching Up: IBM is soliciting good ideas in Africa, Digital Divide Metrics, Charity Link Love » Social ROI: A Social Entrepreneurship Blog

    May 22nd, 2007 at 1:12 am

  5. Omnivores och early adopters » Researcher

    June 9th, 2007 at 12:50 pm

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. eBusiness

    May 6th, 2007 at 8:37 pm

    In the not so distant future this growing trend may see us lose the global war for dominance in eBusiness.

    http://www.ebizmba.com

  2. Steven Hodson

    May 6th, 2007 at 8:54 pm

    funny I wrote about this divide back in March (http://www.winextra.com/2007/03/26/the-real-technological-class-division/) but garnered no reactions .. interesting to see Pew coming up with the same thing.

  3. Tom

    May 6th, 2007 at 9:05 pm

    The digital divde was a hot button issue about 9 years ago, but this is not what it means. Just because someone doesn’t embrace Web 2.0 doesn’t relate to the digital divide. The true “divide” is between people who have or have not access to the basic internet or technology, not those who don’t want to embrace or use web 2.0 or the latest technology. Disapointing that you reported such a far off story.

  4. Scott

    May 6th, 2007 at 9:05 pm

    These results are not the least bit surprising. Younger people tend to embrace technology for technology’s sake, as long as they can afford it. Older people are much more likely to weigh benefit against cost, time investment and aggravation. And when you factor in the full user experience (think hardware complexity, Windows complexity, constantly changing web experience), most web apps are a hard sell.

    And as it relates to Myspace/Facebook type apps, I’m also willing to venture that older folks would much rather spend time building on a few deep relationships with friends than surf the shallow who-likes-who that teenagers prefer.

  5. Duncan Riley

    May 6th, 2007 at 9:10 pm

    Scott
    I suppose the thought I have for you good point is whether Web 2.0 can’t be a part of building deeper relationships, even for an older group?

  6. Steve M.

    May 6th, 2007 at 9:54 pm

    A “digital divide” isn’t a digital divide at all for those who choose to not participate . . . though they have the ability and resources to do so.

    For this apparently rather large percentage of people, being “plugged in” to such a degree to tech/Internet/etc is to them; despite the shock and horror that so many feel this way seems to generate in others; no problem, or drawback, at all.

    So please; no government attention or “fix” needed here . . . maybe they know something we all don’t . . . but should?

  7. Brian

    May 6th, 2007 at 9:54 pm

    @Tom — You have a valid point, but I think the term digital divide is by nature ambiguous, so it would also include web 2.0 savvy Vs. Old School Internet. Besides, how are we defining web 2.0? In terms of technology, design, usability, layout, revenue model, or time-period?

    The digital divide is in fact heavily correlated to age. I would even make the argument that the life changing effect of the internet, and related applications, will only occur in a major way when all living people on the earth are born with access to the internet. 95% of people above 50 have not a clue about web 2.0 or what that even means. To them, the internet = email, ebay, and amazon.com. So not until the year 2040, will we start to see the overwhelming majority of information transfer be done through the network. I was born in 84 (yes, the year of the greatest commercial apple has ever produced for the intro of the macintosh) so by 2040, it’s probably safe to say that the internet will be integral in the lives of at least 5 billion people - good for 70% of the world’s population. Right now, it’s about 20%.

  8. man

    May 6th, 2007 at 10:00 pm

    where is my comment? Duncan you are learning fast

  9. man...i feel ya

    May 6th, 2007 at 10:32 pm

    man, are we on the same page. a-comment-a-post…you with me?

  10. Seth Finkelstein

    May 6th, 2007 at 11:27 pm

    It’s not a Digital Divide, it’s a “Hangout Divide”. People who are married, possibly with kids, and full-time professional jobs, tend not to spend a lot of time on the sort of chat/IM/FaceBook/etc. that teens and such do.

  11. man

    May 6th, 2007 at 11:59 pm

    sure am

  12. Chris E

    May 7th, 2007 at 3:00 am

    “…a disturbing number are either not getting the message, or are choosing not to participate.”

    I am not disturbed by this gap because I do not think it represents gaps in far more important areas such as health, education, wealth and happiness. I enjoy many new technologies. At the same time I have many friends and family who couldn’t care less and their quality of life is excellent. The faster technology moves, the greater the gap will be between usage by the early adopters and the mainstream. This is not something to necessarily be worried about.

  13. George Nimeh

    May 7th, 2007 at 4:15 am

    Duncan,

    It is still quite early in the adoption cycle, and it should come as no surprise that adoption is being led by a small, tech-savvy group of younger, media-driven enthusiasts and early-adopters.

    I find the fact that there are 31% of American adults who are considered to be “elite tech users” to be encouraging. Almost one third of US adults? Incredible. How some can think that this is not an incredibly encouraging number is beyond me.

    And what’s with the Nintendo Wii comparison? Trying to make an argument related to a shift in the global tech market and user-adoption cycle by using the marketing tactics of a single product is a bit weird.

    Just my $0.02,
    ~G~

  14. Dean

    May 7th, 2007 at 5:30 am

    That 8% is a highly sought after segment that will spend lots of cash for many years to come. Web 2.0 is creating unique intelligence that marketers will use to hack into our brains… quick smash your computers and build a fort in the woods!!!

  15. Isaac van Deelen

    May 7th, 2007 at 5:52 am

    a) supporting Tom!
    b) I was only flipping through the graphs, but if I had my eyes open, the study is not comparing figures with earlier stats.
    c) PEW (the same John Horrigan) released a study (http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Broadband_trends2006.pdf) in May 2006, showing the following figures:
    Age 50-64: Broadband in 2005 (27%), Broadband in 2006 (38%)
    Age 65+: Broadband in 2005 (8%), Broadband in 2006 (13%)
    Less than high school: Broadband in 2005 (10%), Broadband in 2006 (17%)
    Under $30K income: Broadband in 2005 (15%), Broadband in 2006 (21%)

    d) if anything, digital divide is decreasing.

  16. Eric

    May 7th, 2007 at 7:10 am

    “The median age of the Top 8% is 28 with more than half of them under the age of 30. ”

    I hate to nitpick, but this sentence is stupid. If the median age is 28, then *by definition* half of them are younger than 28, and more than half would be under 30. So what was the point of stating that?

  17. Pierre T

    May 7th, 2007 at 7:12 am

    completly agree with Chris E. we have to be careful with the words we’re using. this so-called “divide” is first of all not a divide, secondly, not alarming at all. it is simply the normal adoption curve (pardon my english, i’m french….). At some point, people need to start realizing that the whole planet is not on facebook, or wants to be for that matter. and the world was doing just fine before/without the internet. it was simply different.
    i’m part of the 8% omnivores by the way, so i’m in no way a techno-phobe, and i think there are wonderful things happening because of internet technology (i.e. http://www.kiva.org), but please, let’s put things in perspective a bit. there is a real world outside, with real divides. my 2 cents

  18. chris

    May 7th, 2007 at 7:33 am

    *** grammar police citation ***
    “it’s just that there not using Web 2.0.”

  19. Marshall Kirkpatrick

    May 7th, 2007 at 7:42 am

    Economic class presumably accounts for far more of this than choice. Having relatively less access to information, communication and opportunities for self expression adversely impacts quality of life and is an issue of social justice, IMHO.

  20. Leszek Pawlowicz

    May 7th, 2007 at 7:43 am

    Who has time to keep up with all the developments in Web 2.0, except those who make a living (or hobby) out of keeping up with developments in Web 2.0? And who can pick and choose which Web 2.0 services are right from the enormous number of choices?

    Seems to me that you can divide everyone into a number of groupings:

    1. A small core of enthusiasts for whom just the “coolness” of Web 2.0 is enough, and who may not ask the question about whether “coolness” is useful

    2. A somewhat larger group of interested people who know and understand Web 2.0, but aren’t obsessed with it.

    3. The largest group, who could benefit from some Web 2.0 in their life, but either can’t decide which one is right, or don’t have the time to figure it out for themselves.

    4. Those who don’t want Web 2.0, because they don’t see the need, or find the process of learning all this stuff intimidating (something that group 1 forgets about all the time).

    Choice is a good thing, but too much choice isn’t. I’m pretty smart, and I can remember a lot, but I’ve given up on trying to keep track of what’s out there, and whether I should bother to learn any of it. Life is too short, and Web 2.0 isn’t life.

  21. Eric

    May 7th, 2007 at 9:44 am

    We tend to assume that tech skills are a barrier that keep people from taking full advantage of the interactive opportunities that Web 2.0 offers.

    Frankly, I wonder.

    For decades, market researchers like Roper Starch have found that only about 10% of the population really enjoys sharing their opinions — talking politics, recommending books and movies, urging friends to shop (or not) at a store they’ve visited, etc…

    I bet that in ten years, we’ll still see a small minority of people who are very active and connected, and a majority that is much less so.

  22. maxconfus

    May 7th, 2007 at 11:32 am

    Most people I know don’t care about web 2.0 or the Internet in general.

  23. John

    May 7th, 2007 at 12:44 pm

    Does anyone else find it curious/disturbing that the survey used by this Pew study was done “between February 15 and April 6, 2006″. That’s 2006!? The analysis was published May 7, 2007. It’s hard to have much confidence in (a) the numbers from over a year ago reflecting current reality, or (b) Pew’s ability to contribute anything meaningful to this discussion if it took them a year to analyze the numbers and create this report.

  24. BetaBonnie

    May 7th, 2007 at 1:53 pm

    In 1950, Dr. Goldmark of CBS developed a system for broadcasting in color. His method was not compatible with the present black and white TVs, so when RCA developed a color system that was compatible, the FCC accepted it as the standard. Americans were thrilled with the idea of color TV, but it wasn’t until 1978 that the number of color TVs in American homes outnumbered the number of black and white sets. Web 2.0 will catch on.

    >The study found that the Top 8% are young, ethnically diverse, and mostly male (70%).

  25. Oliver Widder

    May 7th, 2007 at 2:02 pm

    Do we have to bridge the Digital Divide?
    See my small (recent) cartoon:
    http://geekandpoke.typepad.com.....he_di.html

    and an older one:
    http://geekandpoke.typepad.com.....is_on.html

    Bye,
    Oliver

  26. April

    May 9th, 2007 at 11:45 am

    This was slightly interesting, but I have to concur with other posters, the “digital divide” does refer to the economic ability to have basic internet access. As the long lines at our city library’s computer room attest, there are lots of kids who don’t have computers at home.

    PS: I think it would be useful to use another word/phrase to refer to the difference between heavy and light technology users.

  27. David Scott Lewis

    May 11th, 2007 at 12:59 am

    Is anybody really surprised by these results? Let me put this another way: IF somebody was surprised by these results (and viewed them negatively) OR if they view them positively as some sort of market opportunity, then they’ve had way too much spiked Kool-Aid and/or are living in a reality distortion field (and probably have active SL and Twitter accounts).

    Everyone, let’s get a grip and realize that most people don’t give a rats-@$$ about this stuff. It’s our hobby; that’s all it is. We can talk about productivity gains and other such BS, but it’s really nothing more than a hobby. Web 2.0 is not changing the world … and believing so does not make it true.

  28. Al X

    May 23rd, 2007 at 9:03 am

    Tom.
    I agree with your comment. Just because a lot of folks don’t want to embrace a certain web version doesn’t necessarily mean the digital divide is starting to widen. I mean, not in the U.S. anyway. A lot of people are walking around with cellphones and/or blackberries that have internet wherever they go. Elementary schools have internet/computer in their curriculum as well. If folks out in the rural areas do not want to get for themselves computer equipment, they can still be reach via television broadcast and the telephone. If digital divide is an issue in the U.S. based on Pew Internet’s report, perhaps we should look beyond our shores and see what kind of divide there is in Africa (for one).

    Brian,
    Your estimate that the digital world is hooked up to about 20% of the world’s population is incorrect. According to Larry Irving, former US assistant sec of commerce on BBC News Online, only 2% of the world’s population is actually digitally connected. Jane Black of BBC News also wrote, ” more than 80% of people in the world have never heard a dial tone, let alone sent an email or downloaded information from the World Wide Web.”

    Al X

« Previous post
Next post »