The following abstracts/full texts include also contributions from ICIE members that will not be face-to-face present during the symposium.These virtual contributions are marked with an * 

Eike Bohlken: Der Digital Divide als Hindernis einer interkulturellen Ethik? 
Zum Verhältnis virtueller und symbolischer Räume  
Rafael Capurro: Digital Divide oder Informationsgerechtigkeit? 
Andreas Greis: Cybergeography - Raumstrukturen des Digital Divide 
Matthias Kettner: "Läßt sich diskursive Macht digital (ver)teilen?" 
*Michel Menou: Digital and Social Equity? Opportunities and threats on the road to empowerment  
*Makoto Nakada et al.: The Positive and Negataive Aspects of "Digital Divide" Theories  
Rupert Scheule: »Get Afrika Connected« Vernetzungsgerechtigkeit (iustitia reticulata) und ihre Implementierung 
Wolfgang Sützl: Netzkunst und Digital Divide  
Karsten Weber: Kann non-proprietäre Software eine Lösung für den "digital Divide" sein? 
Felix Weil: Was trennt der Digital Divide? 
Klaus Wiegerling: Kultur versus Globalisierung Zur Frage nach den ethischen Konsequenzen informationstechnologisch disponierter Globalisierungsstrategien. 
 

---

Der Digital Divide als Hindernis einer interkulturellen Ethik? 
Zum Verhältnis virtueller und symbolischer Räume  

Eike Bohlken 
Technische Universität HH 
210171 Hamburg 
bohlken@tu-hamburg.de 

Das neue Medium Internet birgt in mehrerer Hinsicht ein emanzipatorisches Potenzial. Es ermöglicht jedem, der über die nötigen Zugangsvoraussetzungen verfügt, selbst zum Sender von Medienangeboten zu werden. Dieser Möglichkeit zur Produktion und Distribution eigener Inhalte geht zugleich eine Ausdehnung der Reichweite einher, da diese Angebote ohne Zeitverlust weltweit abgerufen werden können. Der Eintritt in den virtuellen Raum des Internets erlaubt ein Überschreiten territorialer und zeitlicher Grenzen (Stichwort: global village). Dieser grenzüberschreitende Charakter des Internets legt es nahe, es im Rahmen einer universalistischen interkulturellen Ethik zu betrachten.  

Im Zentrum einer solchen kulturübergreifenden Ethik steht das Ideal einer kulturellen Autonomie als Maßstab interkultureller Sittlichkeit. Kulturelle Autonomie bedeutet die Möglichkeit der freien Betätigung in einer Reihe universell verstehbarer und irreduzibler Kulturbereiche (wie z.B. Wissenschaft, Ethik, Kunst, Religion). Diese universell verstehbaren Kulturbereiche lassen sich am treffendsten als symbolische Räume oder Sinnhorizonte charakterisieren. Während die konkrete Ausgestaltung der entsprechenden kulturellen Praktiken in verschiedenen Kulturgemeinschaften und zu verschiedenen Zeiten unterschiedlich ausfallen kann, lässt sich den einen übergreifenden Verständnisrahmen bildenden Sinnhorizonten eine überhistorische Geltung zusprechen. Sie sind unabhängig von Territorien oder ethnischer Zugehörigkeit zu denken. Als interkulturell sittlich sind diejenigen Gesellschaften zu bezeichnen, die ihrer Bevölkerung die Betätigung in allen universellen Kulturgebieten ermöglichen.  

Im Hinblick auf das Tagungsthema führt diese Konzeption einer interkulturellen Ethik auf zwei Fragestellungen:  

1.) Ergibt sich die Frage, in welchem Verhältnis der virtuelle Raum des Internets zu den symbolischen Räumen kultureller Sinnhorizonte steht. Fungieren die Gegenstände oder Sinngebilde der einzelnen Kulturbereiche lediglich als digitalisierbarer Content? Was ändert sich an der Produktion von Kulturgegenständen, wenn diese im oder für das Internet hergestellt werden?

2.) Ist zu klären, inwieweit der Zugang zum Internet als Ermöglichungsbedingung – bzw. der Digital Divide als Hindernis – einer kulturellen Autonomie bzw. interkulturellen Sittlichkeit zu betrachten ist. Dabei gilt es zu präzisieren, was für eine Art von Gut der Zugang zum Internet darstellt. Er könnte a) als Menschenrecht oder Grundgut postuliert werden, b) als Bedingungsgut zu einem solchen Recht (etwa der Meinungsfreiheit oder des Rechts auf Bildung) oder c) als von der Sphäre moralischer (Grund)Rechte unabhängiges Gut, dem eine Bedeutung für ein gelungenes Leben oder für das Erreichen eines bestimmten Lebensstandards zukommt.

Vor allem die Präzisierung der zweiten Fragestellung ist von zentraler Bedeutung für das Thema der Tagung: Sie entscheidet nicht nur darüber, inwieweit der Digital Divide ein Hindernis für eine interkulturelle Ethik bildet, sondern auch darüber, ob er überhaupt ein ethisches Problem darstellt und ob Forderungen zu seiner Überwindung die Geltung einer moralischen Norm für sich beanspruchen können.
 

---

DIGITAL DIVIDE ODER INFORMATIONSGERECHTIGKEIT?  

Rafael Capurro  
FH Stuttgart, Hochschule der Medien  
Wolframstr. 32
70191 Stuttgart  
rafael@capurro.de

Von rund sechs Milliarden Menschen sind etwa 6% online. Warum nehmen die Menschen nicht am Internet teil? Kein Bedarf? kein Computer? kein Interesse? kein Wissen, wie man es nutzt?  kein Geld? keine Infrastruktur? Diese Fragen betreffen nicht nur die Trennung zwischen armen und reichen Ländern, sondern sie stellen sich innerhalb einer jeden Gesellschaft. Die Frage nach dem digital divide wirft in neuer Form die Frage nach dem Wesen (verbal gedacht) der Gerechtigkeit auf: Welche Formen der Selbstbestimmung und/oder Ausbeutung ermöglicht globale Vernetzung mit/trotz ihrer dezentraler Struktur? Wie findet der Übergang von einer neuzeitlich als Autonomie gedachten Verantwortung zu einer vernetzten Verantwortung statt? Wie ist eine "informationelle Gerechtigkeit" (K. Weber) zu konzipieren?

Wir leben in einer message society, in der jeder das Recht haben sollte, nicht bloß, wie in einer von den Massenmedien bestimmten Gesellschaft, Empfänger, sondern ebensosehr Sender zu sein. Wie ist aber unter den Bedingungen von moralischer Pluralität und Multikulturalität eine informationelle Synergie zu denken, die die Welt weder in ein globales Kasino noch in ein digitales Tollhaus verwandelt? Die Diskussion um die minima moralia in diesen Fragen ist im vollen Gange. Die Forderungen nach einer Liberalisierung des Wissensaustausches (Copyright-Debatte), nach einer nachhaltigen Entwicklung der IT in Unternehmen, nach der Anwendung der IT im Gesundheitsbereich, nach der Schaffung von lokalen Gemeinschaften auf IT-Basis, nach der Unterstützung von Bildungsaktivitäten durch Nutzung digitaler Vernetzung u.v.m. zeugen von einer Weltgesellschaft, die sich zwar tiefgreifend technologisch verändert aber den Horizont, worunter diese Veränderungen stattfinden sollten, nur unzureichend thematisiert. Ich plädiere für eine Abschwächung abstrakter Gerechtigkeitsziele hinter (öfter: vor) denen sich konkrete Machtansprüche verbergen.

Wie das Leben des Einzelnen oder ganzer Gesellschaften sich (!) in der Dimension des Digitalen einschreibt, wird im 21. Jahrhundert erprobt. Das Wesen (verbal gedacht) der Gerechtigkeit wird dabei entscheidend davon abhängen, welche Dimensionen des Menschseins wir im Wechselspiel mit dem Digitalen einbringen und wie diese stets fragile Verhältnisse sich gewaltfrei entfalten lassen.

Diese Fragen werden anhand der Kritik an das "Harvard Networked World Readines Guide" durch María Edith Arce und Cornelio Hopman: "The Concept of E-Readiness..." (2002) sowie des kollektiven Dokuments "Working the Internet with a Social Vision" der Mistica Virtual Community (2002) behandelt. Deutsche Übersetzung dieses Dokuments in: R. Capurro: Eine lateinamerikanische Antwort auf die digitale Spaltung

PowerPoint-Präsentation

Vgl. auch v.Vf.: Informationsgerechtigkeit - Ein Nachtrag.
 

---

CYBERGEOGRAPHY - RAUMSTRUKTUREN DES DIGITAL DIVIDE 

Andreas Greis 
Katharinenstr. 41 
72072 Tübingen 
andreas.greis@web.de 

Der Digital Divide hat neben seinen inhaltlichen Komponenten auch ein räumliches Korrelat, das sich in Verteilungs- und Vernetzungsstrukturen aufzeigen lässt. Gleichzeitig kann eben-falls gezeigt werden, dass diese Raumstrukturen ungefähr auch denjenigen gleichen, die die globalen Disparitäten anzeigen, die mit Nord-Süd-Konflikt beschrieben werden. Der Digital Divide manifestiert damit globale Ungleichgewichte in ökonomischer und politischer Hin-sicht und ist ein Ausdruck derselben.  
Die Frage, die sich angesichts dieses Befundes stellt, ist, ob die Überwindung des Digital Divide eine Strategie darstellen kann, globale Ungleichgewichte zu überwinden, indem ein erhöhter Wissens- und Kompetenzzufluss autochthone Entwicklung ermöglicht, oder ob es nicht primär darum geht basale Bedürfnisse wie ausreichende Ernährung, ausreichende Wasserversorgung zu befriedigen und auf diesem Wege eine Entwicklung zu initiieren, mittels derer der Digital Divide dann überwunden wird. 

---

LÄSST SICH DISKURSIVE MACHT DIGITAL (VER)TEILEN?

Matthias Kettner 
Senckenberganlage 31, Postfach 11 19 32 
60054 Frankfurt am Main 

kettner@em.uni-frankfurt.de   
 

Die Nutzungsmöglichkeiten internetbasierter Kommunikation sind, das ist unbestreitbar, global sehr ungleich verteilt und dies wird sich in der absehbaren Zukunft vermutlich nicht wesentlich ändern. Ich möchte unter einem spezifisch diskurstheoretischen Gesichtspunkt nach bewertbaren Konsequenzen solcher Ungleichheit fragen. Dazu operiere ich mit dem Begriff einer "diskursiver Macht": diskursive Macht ist die intentionale Durchsetzung von, die Autorität guter Gründe betreffenden Richtigkeitsvorstellungen, eine Autorität, die auf die wechselseitige Anerkennung unter rationalen Bewertern angewiesen ist. Im rationalen Eigensinn dieser Machtform liegt es (weil sie auf wechselseitige Anerkennung angewiesen ist), daß sie sich nicht einseitig "durchsetzen" kann - ein Potential von Gegenmacht gegen andere, asymmetrisch durchsetzbare Machtformen. Andererseits hängen Potential und Aktualisierung dieser Gegenmacht von materialen Bedingungen für die Erzeugung und Erhaltung von Argumentationsgemeinschaften ab, materiale Bedingungen, die der Entfaltung diskursiver Macht vorausliegen, sie kanalisieren und beschränken. Darüber, wie Digitalisierung diese Bedingungen verändert, welche Konsequenzen für die diskursive Macht und welche Konsequenzen dies wiederum für andere Machtformen hat, werde ich einige Thesen vortragen. 

 

---

*DIGITAL AND SOCIAL EQUITY?  
Opportunities and threats on the road to empowerment  

Michel J. Menou  
Department of Information Science  
The City University  
London, U.K.  
Michel.Menou@wanodoo.fr.  

This paper was originally presented at: LIDA 2001 Annual Course and Conference: Libraries in the Digital Age Dubrovnik, Croatia 23-27 May, 2001. 

Abstract  

The so called "Digital Divide" has received increasing attention in the past few years in the highest circles, including the G8 summit. The lack of connectivity is said to be a major risk for the welfare of people while being connected is depicted as a free entrance ticket to paradise. Such millenarian views are both simplistic and unethical. They are a symptom of a spreading mental disease which we called "hICTeria". A more objective and balanced look at present divides and their causes is required. It is also useful to consider what role the Information and Communication technologies may play in people's struggle with their key problems and what other conditions should be met for this role to be effective. These issues will be considered from a broad perspective anchored in the situation of the majority of this planet population which do not leave in the OECD member countries.  
  

Introduction: the Digital Divide mania  

"We should bridge the digital divide" seems to have become within a few years the rulers’ most trendy political slogan on local, national and international scenes. Its popularity among those in power is, as usual, directly connected to the vagueness of its contents and infinite variations of its interpretation. Public ICT policies can hardly go without the required acknowledgment that providing an Internet connection to those who are not yet enjoying it is a top priority. The growth of the Internet, if not its invention, is on the way to substitute other noteworthy achievements such as reduction of unemployment, public deficit or else, as a major topic in political campaigns. The industry, having rushed to demonstrate that it is at the forefront of progress by stuffing its advertising with URLs, is not less vocal in demonstrating its concern. The non-governmental organizations, as they often are operating on the front line to try and offset social inequalities, naturally join their voice to the concert. All international governmental organizations hurry to appoint committees, call for conferences and commission reports which are painfully rehashing the same odd considerations.  

At their 2000 summit, the G8 members found in the reduction of the digital divide a convenient palliation to not having kept their previous year's promise about the reduction of the debt of the poorest countries. While the new millennium (according to the Gregorian calendar) was inaugurated with the first World Social Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil, the Davos World Economic Forum, never short of imagination, invited its participants to discuss ways to bridge the digital divide.  

When an idea is so much talked about, from all corners, one might become suspicious. The more visibility often goes with the less activity. What is supposed to legitimate the slogan is the assumption, reiterated under various forms, that:  

"Information and Communications Technology (IT) is one of the most potent forces in shaping the twenty-first century. Its revolutionary impact affects the way people live, learn and work and the way government interacts with civil society. IT is fast becoming a vital engine of growth for the world economy. It is also enabling many enterprising individuals, firms and communities, in all parts of the globe, to address economic and social challenges with greater efficiency and imagination. Enormous opportunities are there to be seized and shared by us all [1]". Don’t miss the N.I.I.rvana!  

The description of all the benefits that humanity will derive from the extensive application of ICT is often quite similar to advertisements for the cruise of your life in the South Seas. Presenting the concept of the Global Information Infrastructure (G.I.I.) before the ITU, the then U.S. Vice-President Gore claimed that it will allow:  
"Sharing of information  
To communicate as a global community  
Greater sense of shared stewardship of our small planet  
Strong democracies  
Better solutions to global and local environmental challenges  
Improved healthcare  
To educate our children  
Robust and sustainable economic progress  
A global information market place where consumers can buy and sell products  
A global economy driven by the growth of the information age  
Opening markets [2] "  

Since the G.I.I. was sort of extension of the (U.S.) National Information Infrastructure, or N.I.I., it was hard to resist the temptation of calling the state of affairs so described the N.I.I.rvana. Before one reaches it however, reality must undergo a number of transformations. The now dominant perspective of a technological determinism whose positive outcomes are grossly over-estimated, while the negative ones are eventually forgotten, was referred to by Richard Heeks [3] as an "ICT fetish". An expression which has the advantage of reminding of the perversion that may explain both the phenomenon and its description.  

One cannot question the fact that ICT applications are interfering with, and thus have the potential of transforming, all realms of human endeavour, if not the species itself. The extent to which the positive aspects of these transformations will offset the negative ones remain to be seen. The balance between economic and social concerns and relationships between the two are far from clear or simple in statements like the G8 one above. One may wonder who is going to seize what opportunities and who is going to share what, assuming all have a share in the returns. In their pioneering study of the US information economy, some 25 years ago, Porat and Rubin [4] stressed the urgent need for achieving a thorough understanding of the transformations taking place, so that their negative effects could possibly be avoided, contrary to what happen with the industrial revolution. It is significant that very little has been achieved in this direction.  

There are, however, a number of opponents who continue to claim that there are far more important needs to be met in the developing world than getting everybody online. What, if accomplished, will this do to cure such problems as endemic diseases, environmental degradation, political instability, etc? Should not the people be first properly fed and cured before being given means to communicate? Clearly a Luddite attitude geared at an absolute rejection of ICT is neither appropriate or feasible. Simplifying the issues in an "either-or" debate is not any more likely to enlighten us. Since pros and cons are not less excessive and undiscriminating in their points, we preferred to coin the name 'hICTeria', after hysteria, for this 'new' (everything is new in the contemporary world, especially the oldest facts and ideas) mental state. So let’s try and go beyond it.  
  

Scope of the Digital Divide  

What is the Digital Divide?  

On the international scene, which is our main concern, it is said to result from the fact that there is a huge and growing gap between the more advanced countries and the others regarding the size and intensity of their ICT applications. If the natural growth of this gap is not corrected, a number of countries are said to run the risk of being left aside of the E-economy. On the domestic scene, the digital divide is seen when a significant portion of the population has no access to ICT at an affordable cost and possibly also no skill to use them. As a result, this segment of the population is deprived from such benefits as access to information and participation in the global e-commerce networks. Such a divide exists in all countries, would it be only because of the "novelty" of ICT. A social and political problem arises when it tends to become a standing feature or is not significantly declining. The more so if in the mean time, the group of those with access, or should we call them the "ICTrich" enjoy expanding capabilities.  

A vexing ambiguity results from the fact that the existence of the digital divide is basically measured against the percentile of people holding an Internet access account. Other infrastructure related indicators eventually come into the picture, such as line density, network speed, number of domain names, etc. Such measures are a mere reflection of the individual consumption model of "advanced capitalism". Whether this "model" is the only valid and effective one remains to be demonstrated [5]. It was pointed out recently that if in China each adult came to have a car the world's oil reserves would quickly be exhausted, not to mention what the resulting increase in pollution would do to the planet. A number of studies have shown that actual users of an Internet account or connected computer, not only in the developing world, may range from a few to several hundreds [6]. The digital divide metrics may indeed refer more to the appetite for new markets rather than equity concerns.  

In any case there is a serious need for articulating a more effective definition of this phenomenon. The reference to the concept of affordable access inherited from the regulations of universal service for the telephone may not be sufficient. As high speed and bandwidth networks proliferate among the ICTrich, and an increasing number of critical applications do require them, the quality of service needs to come into the picture. A useful complement was introduced by the consideration of accessibility, which refer to the alleviation of disabilities suffered by a far from negligible portion of the population, e.g. sight, hear or motility impairments. Other inabilities, like illiteracy, or ignorance of the major communication languages, are far more widespread. Widening if not generalizing IT literacy, which is a common feature of policies related to the Digital Divide, is certainly desirable but will not overcome basic illiteracy; it may indeed reinforce this aspect of the divide. Judging from the unequal success, to use a diplomatic understatement, of the campaigns to eradicate illiteracy over the past decades, it appears that intermediation through social structures might indeed be the only viable answer.  

One may be mislead by the growth of content on the Internet, or more generally in digital form, in languages other than English. This is obviously a basic requirement for the huge majority of the world’s population whose native language is not English. But the fact that resources are available, or at least searchable, into one’s native language does not ipso facto make the latter relevant. Homeless people may well be able to search the site of high street luxury shops, that won’t really help them for more than "dreaming" of a good life (what of course those working in the "people" media claim is as necessary as primary health care). Villagers of the Niger delta may well find information about the environmental protection programmes of the oil companies, it wont help them clean their air. More than in access to information, the digital divide will possibly take a more subtle an far reaching form: the one between those who own the information and all the others, especially those who need it. The push toward extensive private appropriation of all types of information which has been witnessed in the past few years is quite symptomatic in this respect. When ordinary words and expressions can become proprietary for the only reason they have been used in advertising campaigns and registered, the free flow of information might suffer serious threats; and so is common sense.  
  

Avoided divides  

The digital divide exists for sure. But strange enough, when compared to other socio-economic characteristics, it tends to coincide with most aspects of social inequalities. Anywhere in the world a person who is a member of a minority, poor, rural, ill educated has all chances to have no access to ICT nor possibility to use them. Far from being reduced, those divides tend to grow in the majority of countries. Legislation and programmes for overcoming them, when they exist and are enforced, are challenged by the tenants of the "laws of the market" as the universal rule. Up to now, with few exceptions, they have not been able to significantly improve the lot of the poorest quartile of any population. If connectivity is so essential, one may wonder why is it not free, or at least recognised as a basic human entitlement (which is coming only very slowly), and why is it not taxed at the same rate as staple goods and services? Could it be because the natural growth of the market is taken for granted? These ambiguities are well illustrated when the Chairman of the US Federal Communications Commission equates the notion of digital divide to a 'Mercedes divide' he allegedly suffers from, but which he gets along with [7]. What is understandable since he is himself a victim of another divide, the "VIP Dad" one.  

Neither is the gap between the "more advanced" countries and the others limited to ICT. For centuries all aspects of society have been drastically undermined by foreign and/or internal exploitation, in addition to environmental limitations. So one may ask why not bridge the 'healthy life divide' and ensure that the better off countries mobilize so those drugs against major diseases and decent sanitary conditions are accessible to everyone? Recent judicial actions by pharmaceutical companies in South Africa may have shown the limits of the social commitment of the private sector. Why not bridge the 'fair working conditions divide' – the reduction of which would in practice eradicate slavery after more than one century of its legal abolition? Many other lasting divides could be pointed to. Not only are all those divides flagrant and remnant but they tend to rise as shown in figure 1 below.  
 

Figure 1. Income gap between rich and poor countries

	Richest 20%	Poorest 20%
1960	30	1
1990	60	1
1997	74	1
2020?	100?	1?
Source 1960-1997: UNDP Human Development Report 1999.    2020 data our projection.

  

Would perhaps the difference between the latter divides and the digital divide lie in the fact that a global ICT market can actually be achieved and much less for instance a cheap tri-therapy market? The title of the international conference "Creating the Digital Dividend" organized by the World Resources Institute in 2000 is quite explicit in this respect as were many comments. As C.K. Prahalad put it, though with a far more innovative and enlightened vision than most of the other contributors [8]:  

"The primary task is to create a consumer market out of the poor, albeit one that is conceived of and structured very differently from the Tier #1 market" One may notice, hopefully without plunging the heralds of Newness into despair, that earlier ICT, such as the disposable roller ball pen or the transistor radio, have long ago shown the way. Turning the poor into consumers is a commendable objective. In the eyes of the private sector, this objective is likely to be much faster and easier to achieve through divestiture of public telecommunications infrastructure than by raising the poor income. It will be quite interesting to compare the growth of teledensity ten years after divestiture with the same figure in the 10 years preceding it. Of course, good apostles will rush to demonstrate the goodness of the principles by pointing to such examples as Grameen telecoms, like the democratic nature of French society can be shown from the fact that each century the son of a "gendarme" (military police man) becomes field marshall.  

  
Threats and promises  
  
Rather than the birth of a digital divide we might be witnessing the digitalisation of the divides. The questions which are not, or seldom, raised in the digital divide debate are perhaps significant of the double language used by those in charge. Connected to what? Connected for what? As if the simple fact of being connected in itself brought to bear all possible economic, educational, cultural or social benefits. Cars offer yet another striking example since the "intelligent car", on which so much R&D funds are spent, is likely to result in the re-invention of something very close to the train, except for the private cubicles!  

For years international development co-operation has been built upon the same misconception, or hypocrisy, as colonisation: the more powerful know better. Let us assume for one moment, something that is far from the case, that all the world's information resources, mainly from the 'North', contain appropriate answers to the real life problems most people, who happened to live in the 'South', have, and could be accessed by the latter, paying of course! There would be, however, no moves to transform all the basic conditions that currently prevent the successful utilisation of this information.  

The Internet is like the Delphi oracle it can give the information, it cannot change destiny. It is people with vision, hope, energy, space to move and luck which make the changes. This is not to deny that ICT are indeed capable of fostering such factors and, especially, opening new spaces. But what should be really at stake is social change and not the marketing of ICTs. As Castells pointed out [9]:  

"It is the entire social organization that becomes productive or, on the contrary, an obstacle for innovation, and thus for productivity growth." The central point in the debate about the digital divide should not be what is the best way to bring ICT to the poor, but what is the best way for the poor to take advantage of ICT in order to improve their lot. The consequence of this premise is, as Hamelink put it [10] that:   "The challenge, in both public and private scenarios, is to place the public interest at the center of policy considerations and to ensure that adequate mechanisms for public accountability exist." From this perspective it is striking to note that the so-called ICT revolution seems to be surfing on the wave of neo-liberal privatisations. No society in history has ever left to the unpredictable – or else all too predictable – forces of an abstract entity, like 'the market', the responsibility for establishing and managing a strategically critical resource. While public-private partnerships are certainly welcome, and possibly necessary for the development of an 'information society', they can only be fruitful if there is a common vision and commitment. Observing the enthusiasm of the private sector when asked to bring connectivity to remote and low-density rural areas, not to mention high bandwidth, makes one sceptical about its commitment to social goals. Fair enough since its raison d'être is profit. In many instances, the natural spokesman for public interest, the State, often seems to have other concerns; it may be appropriate to turn the table. It is up to the concerned communities to organise themselves and figure out how they can make use of the ICT.  

In all parts of the world, community networks are expanding and gaining maturity, as witnessed by the Global Community Networks conference held in Barcelona at the end of 2000. Rather than spending considerable amounts of money on governmental or other "high level" conferences simply to talk about the digital divide, and repeatedly study the phenomenon, one would be better advised to create conditions for these efforts to concretise, and provide the necessary support for the networks to take off and grow.  

More importantly, it is more than time with respect to any activity on this planet, till something is still left of it, to question its rationale. Why and what for? It is more than time to take a critical look at the discourse of all stake holders and re-establish the true sense of words. It is more than time to consider the single neo-liberal dogma for what it is, a dogma without challenger, that is a potentially totalitarian dogma. Making an abstract notion like the "market" the superior power of all things is not less perverse than claiming the superiority of any religion, ideology or race. At least the first ICT revolution aimed at spreading "God’s word" rather than increasing the stock value of ICT companies. At the time of writing the above we saw an advertising on television by an high tech company. It showed two alpinists painfully reaching the summit of a high mountain and switching on a hand held "new generation computrick" in order to watch their favourite soap opera. The waves did not start an avalanche, but the stupidity of this concept is commensurate only to the Himalayas.  

References  

G8 Charter on Global Information Society, Okinawa, July 22, 2000.  
www.dotforce.org/reports/it1.html (visited 14 April 2001).  
U.S. Vice-President A. Gore. Address to the International Telecommunications Union assembly, Buenos Aires, Argentina, March 21, 1994. Extracts.  
Heeks, R. (1999). Information and communication technologies, poverty and development. Working Paper N° 5. Manchester: Institute for Development Policy and Management. Also available at: http://ww.man.ac.uk/idpm/idpm_dp.htm#devinf_wp  
Porat, M.U. and Rubin, M.F. (1977). The information economy. Washington, D.C: US Department of Commmerce, Vol. 1.  
Communication from R. Heeks to communityinformatics@vcn.bc.ca and further discussion February 2001.  
Menou, M.J. (1999). Electronic communications in African development: Tracking their impact. In Macdonald, S.; Nightingale, J., Eds., Information and Organization. A tribute to the work of Don Lamberton. Amsterdam, Elsevier, p. 371-392.  
Labaton, S. New F.C.C. Chief would curb agency reach. [Press conference with M.K. Powell.] The New York Times, 7 February, 2001.  
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/02/07/technology/07FCC.html?pagewanted=1 (visited 16 February 2001).  
Prahalad, C.K. (2000). Radically new business models. Strategies for the bottom of the pyramid: The Poor as a Source of Innovations. Paper presented at Creating Digital Dividend, Seattle, WA., 16-18 Ocotber 2000. www.digitaldividend.org (visited 14^th April, 2001).  
Castells, M. (1999). Information technology, globalization and social development. Discussion paper 114. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, p.11.  
Hamelink, C. (1999). ICTs and social development. The global policy context. Discussion paper 116. Geneva: United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, p. 22.  
 

---

THE POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF "DIGITAL DIVIDE" THEORIES

Makoto Nakada (1), Takanori Tamura (1), Tadashi Takenouchi (2), Leslie Tkach Kawasaki (1), Toshikazu IItaka (1)  

(1) University of Tsukuba, Japan 
(2) University of Library and Information Science, Japan 

Makoto Nakada 
The Research Group on the Information Society (ReGIS) 
The University of Tsukuba, College of Humanities 
Ninomiya 1-18-28, Tsukuba, Ibaraki 305-0051, Japan 
 

Note: This online version does not include tables 
 

1. Merits and demerits of discussions on the “digital divide”  

One of the most important problems in analyzing the information society today is understanding the true extent and nature of the “digital divide”. Without a doubt, close examination of this topic offers the possibility of deepening our understanding of IT (information technology) and its impact on our society. In recent years, many people have become aware of the negative aspects of the information society, and apparently this awareness is greatly due to debate focusing on the “digital divide”. In this sense, various discussions concerning the “digital divide” have provided us with valuable insights regarding the true characteristics of the information age. But at the same time, the “digital divide” concept contains a number of ambiguous and confusing aspects, mainly derived from explicit or implicit presuppositions that many scholars share about the crucial role of IT in our society. Certainly, this type of uncritical attitude toward IT is closely related to longstanding theories of the nature of the technologically oriented information society. Consequently, the majority of discussions concerning the “digital divide” merely offer alternative versions of popular and uncritical topics focusing on the technologically oriented information society. 

In this paper, we deeply delve into the ambiguous and confusing aspects of “digital divide” theory by critically analyzing its “hidden bias” and investigating related topics both theoretically and empirically. Using the results from our survey research conducted in July 2002, our intention is to pursue appropriate discussions that suggest a deeper understanding of the hidden nature of the “digital divide”. 
 

2. What is the “digital divide”? 

In order to examine the true nature of discussions concerning the “digital divide” as an alternative version of technologically oriented theories of the information society, we must first carefully investigate the contents of representative discussions conducted to date concerning the “digital divide”. Through the discussions cited below, it is clear that a number of ambiguous and confusing approaches to the technologically oriented information society, as well as certain uncritically accepted visions regarding its nature have arisen to date. 

1) U.S. Department of Commerce Report: “Americans in the information age: Falling through the Net (2000) 

Why is the “digital divide” considered critically important? In the official report of the U.S. Department of Commerce entitled “Americans in the information age: Falling through the Net, released in October 2000 , detailed research concerning the actual condition of the “digital divide” in the U.S. commands serious attention for the following reasons:  

“The Internet is becoming an increasingly vital tool in our information society. More Americans are going online to conduct such day-to-day activities as business transactions, personal correspondence, research and information-gathering, and shopping. Each year, being digitally connected becomes ever more critical to economic, educational, and social advancement. Now that a large number of Americans regularly use the Internet to conduct daily activities, people who lack access to those tools are at a growing disadvantage. Therefore, raising the level of digital inclusion -- by increasing the number of Americans using the technology tools of the digital age -- is a vitally important national goal” (USDC, 2000). 

In the following chapter, the report goes on to simply define the “digital divide” as “differences in the shares of each group that is digitally connected” (USDC, 2000). According to this report, African-Americans and Hispanics continue to experience the lowest household Internet penetration rates. These groups lag behind other ethnic groups in terms of access to the Internet despite government- and private-sector-led initiatives to eliminate the “digital divide” among these various groups in the U.S. 

2)   Information and Communications in Japan WHITE PAPER (2002) 

In the “2002 Information and Communications in Japan WHITE PAPER”, released by the Japanese Ministry of Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecommunications, the term “digital divide” is defined as “differences of access to the Internet among various groups”. This definition is practically the same as that used by the U.S. Government. According to this report, the major factors related to the actual “digital divide” in Japan today are age, regional differences, and income disparities. 

3)  Discussion of the “digital divide” in terms of overall trends towards reform in Japanese society 

In his 2001 publication Dejitaru debaido to wa nanika (translated as “What is the “digital divide”?) (2001), noted Japanese scholar KIMURA Tadamasa, defines the term “digital divide” as noting that it is the situation in which degrees of access to information networks differ greatly among groups of different social strata or among different nations. This difference is related to social economic differences that tend to worsen year by year. KIMURA’s definition is quite similar to that used by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Furthermore, this scholar expresses concern regarding expansion in the level and extent of the “digital divide” arising from continuous diffusion of information networks. According to this scholar, Japan is facing a most serious “digital divide” problem both inwardly and outwardly. 

4)   Definition of the “digital divide” by the Dentsu Institute of Human Studies 

The Dentsu Institute for Human Studies (DIHS), one of the most famous private research institutes in Japan, also employs a definition of the “digital divide” that is almost identical to that used by the U.S. Department of Commerce and the “2002 Information and Communications WHITE PAPER” published in Japan. According to their 2000 report, today’s Japan is facing a very real danger of falling into a “digital divide” and, for this reason, addressing the growing problem of the “digital divide” has provided a major incentive for necessary improvements in IT and Internet diffusion rates in Japan. 

5)   The “digital divide” according to Hindman 

Hindman (2000) critically examines explicit or implicit assumptions of the information society by suggesting that the so-called “digital revolution” is a kind of catchphrase or slogan. According to Hindman, the “digital divide”, which is a particularly serious problem among certain groups such as senior citizens, those with low income levels, and those with low education levels, is directly attributable to imbalances in existing structures of power and rule. Hindman argues that the very existence of these structures implies the inequality in various aspects of democracy in American society. Hindman’s argument is based on secondary analysis of large-scale national surveys conducted in 1995 and 1998 in America. 
 

3. Problems in “digital divide” theory 

After reviewing the definitions and basic concepts, we find that “digital divide” theory as interpreted to date is inherently ambiguous and confusing in terms of many basic points. These points causing confusion can be listed as follows: 

1) The first confusing point is whether the “digital divide” is a cause or a result. Although the “digital divide” is depicted as an effect in the reports issued by the U.S. Department of Commerce and Japan’s Ministry of Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts, and Telecommunications, the Dentsu report and Kimura’s discussion portray the “digital divide” as a cause.  

2) The second point is the tacit premise of an uncritical affirmation of information communication technology. This is true to both theories of the “digital divide” as a cause and the “digital divide” as an effect. The premise is that people who do not use information technology devices, and through them, the Internet, are automatically regarded as stragglers with low adaptation capabilities to social environment. This perspective is an actual or potential premise of “digital divide” theory. Arguments supporting this are direct extensions of the discussions of Alvin Toffler and Daniel Bell who described an information-oriented society as more improved society and asserted that the progress of technology is analogous to the progress of people and society (Toffler, 1980; Bell, 1973).  

3) The “digital divide” theories offered to date overlook the perspective that adaptation to an information environment (depicted as an environment where IT and the Internet occupy major roles) can be damaging to a harmonious world. The reports from the U.S. Department of Commerce regard ready access to and utilization of such technological means as virtues ascribed to the information technology, especially the Internet. However if only information dominates actual human relationships, and that information is irresponsible and unreliable or simply overwhelming in volume, rather than a virtue, it may be considered a potential vice. This is suggested by current events such as the dramatic change in the American economy after the fall of major corporations such as WorldCom and Enron. The controversy that surrounded these events has to do with the amount of trust that people formerly placed in American corporate institutions and illustrates the interrelationship between social, economic, and information-related values. In the same manner, “digital divide” theory has inherent aspects that cannot be completely understood without evaluating the information environment itself. 

4) Negation of various “digital divide” theories. The directions of new deployments in “digital divide” theory are also discernible when we find that while the “digital divide” theories mentioned above present deep and positive arguments for an information society, they are, in fact, merely reducing the extent of information society theory by tacitly reaffirming the existence of a “technical deterministic information society theory”. In light of this, a new definition of the “digital divide” is possible, then, wherein the “digital divide” is characterized as a situation where the domain is determined only by technology and digital media is regarded as overly important. This is a dangerous worldview in which diversity is potentially lost and serious divisions arise in values, states of consciousness, and lifestyles. 

5) The “digital divide” theory as information operations. Related to the above issues, “digital divide” theory can be considered a part of information operations of a certain kind that are either the intentional or unconscious production of images that are to used to propagate technical deterministic information society theory. Examples of information operations are the myth of “productivity” (the myth that the adoption of IT magically raises corporate productivity levels) and the myth of a “new economy”. Moreover, techniques that make up IT, an ambiguous phrase in itself, include various high-tech operations, the Internet, the state of corporate management of a company, outsourcing, among other elements. 

6) The “digital divide” theory as relevant to world unification. We find that the problems of “digital divide” theories are basically the same as those of technical deterministic information society theories, and we suggest an overhaul in this one-sided view of the world in general and technical deterministic information society theory in particular. Rather, we content that these aspects are subjective in nature and that the plurality of the world should gain greater recognition and priority. In pursuing this goal, we suggest that:  

(1) Information communication technology should be positioned in a larger context, i.e., existing structures and existing traditions and customs.
(2) It should not be overlooked that information communication technology is inherently connected with information commercialization.
(3) American values that adhere to deregulation and competitive principles are closely intertwined with information society theories.
(4) We must also consider the problem of synthesizing human experience (making light of various meanings that are related to the future, creativity, imagination, zeal, consciousness, intuition, uncertainty, errors, spaces involving nature and the body, etc.) that have been advanced in the world.
 

4.   The reality of the “digital divide” in Japan and the relationship between IT and values 

Our survey focusing on the reality of the “digital divide” and the relationship between IT and values among Internet users in Japan was administered in August 2002 to a sample population of 569 Internet users between the ages of 25 and 44. According to the results of our survey, there are a number of dichotomies between the above definitions and the actual nature of the “digital divide” among Japanese Internet users. We consider our results to be a valuable indicator of the actual situation of the “digital divide” in Japan as well as the relationship between IT and value judgment on the part of Japanese Internet users.

1)   Major findings 

The main goal and objective of our research project (conducted by “The Research Group of Pathological Studies on the Information Society” led by Professor NAKADA Makoto of the University of Tsukuba) was to analyze the degree and extent of influence of Internet usage and IT upon the consciousness, value judgments, and world view of Internet users. We surmised that rather than mere Internet usage or contact with IT, various factors including existing value judgments, orientation in human relationships, education level, and occupation determine the consciousness and mindset of Internet users. Through our survey results, we were able to empirically clarify many points of ambiguity and confusion concerning discussions of the “digital divide”.

2)   The relationship between Internet usage and value judgments  

One of the most surprising findings of our research was the weak relationship between Internet usage and other factors including various views or opinions, value judgments, and causes (and levels) of anxiety. This lack of a clear linkage between Internet utilization and other factors confirmed the lack of a crucial role for the Internet in our society and in the minds of Japanese people. It is clear that a crucial role for the Internet is impossible without a strong linkage to Internet usage or IT in combination with various psychological or social factors. Our findings seemed to indicate another appropriate interpretation about our society: Rather than Internet usage or mere IT diffusion, the existing total socio-cultural environment (i.e. the “life-world” as described by Husserl) influences and determines the role of the Internet in our society.

(1)      Computer literacy 

Table 4-1 (Cross-tabulated summary of the relationship between computer literacy and values, views, and demographic variables) summarizes the cross-tabulated relationship between “computer literacy” and other dominant socio-psychological values. For the purposes of this paper, we define “computer literacy” as the capacity for using computers or the Internet in various fundamental ways. In our research “computer literacy” was measured through several questions regarding the acquisition of fundamental knowledge concerning the Internet and personal computer utilization. The respondents were classified into four levels of “computer literacy” after reviewing their responses to related questions.

**Not available online: Table 4-1  Cross-tabulated summary of the relationship between computer literacy and values, views, and demographic variables  

As shown in Table 4-1 (Cross-tabulated summary of the relationship between computer literacy and values, views, and demographic variables), there are no clear relationships between computer literacy and other fundamental views or value judgments save for several exceptions. These exceptions disappear when these figures are re-analyzed through partial correlations (Table 4-2 Partial correlation coefficients [literacy]). These findings suggest the “real” (i.e. not exaggerated) role of the Internet or IT in today’s Japanese culture.

**Not available online: Table 4-2 Partial correlation coefficients (computer literacy) 

(2)   Length of experience using the Internet 

Table 4-3 (Summary of relationship between length of experience in using the Internet and values, views, and demographic variables) shows a summary of the cross-tabulated relationships between length of experience in using the Internet and other values, views, and demographic variables. As this table shows, the length of experience in using the Internet has almost no relationship whatsoever with other variables. This result seems to indicate that the prevalent view of the “omnipotence” of the Internet is merely a myth. At least in Japan, the Internet does not occupy a crucial position at this time, contrary to popular scholarly and public opinions.

** Not available online: Table 4-3 Cross-tabulated summary of the relationship between computer literacy and values, views, and demographic variables  

(3)     Factors related to income 

The main findings of our research are that Internet usage and computer literacy have only negligible influence upon other factors such as income, worldview, and fundamental beliefs. (Strictly speaking, Internet usage and computer literacy show the weakest relationships among income, education levels, gender, fundamental beliefs, and traditional values). These findings indicate that our world consists of people’s beliefs, value judgments, traditional cultural meanings, and the like and that IT or the Internet does not exclusively determine this world. This perspective (the world as a multiphasic structure) was also supported in a somewhat different manner through the data presented in Table 4-4 (Partial correlation coefficients [income]). Table 4-4 shows that income level is closely related to education level and certain types of beliefs or values. In a way, this is both surprising and expected. For scholars who believe in the “powerful” influence of the Internet, this fact may seem to be striking, yet while those who believe in the multidimensional world are less likely to be surprised at these results. In any event, it is doubtful that IT or the Internet is a kind of magical source for fundamental social change in Japan. According to our analysis “mutual support orientation” is a very important factor that determines income level, which indicates that our Japanese society is based on certain kinds of spiritual values or meanings. A similar tendency is found regarding other spiritual meanings such as negative orientation towards modern civilization, positive attitudes towards involvement in public affairs or society, and the like. These meanings or beliefs are closely related to income levels in our society.

** Not available online: Table 4-4 Partial correlation coefficients (income) 
 

5. Occupations and the use of the Internet 

A new kind of relationship among users is a typical phenomenon that has occurred simultaneously with increased diffusion of the Internet. This new relationship has realized creative communicative opportunities that are characterized by the free exchange of potentially valuable information among users. This relationship, mainly conducted through the Internet, has also influenced a change in values. In this sense, it can be said that a “digital divide” occurs when people cannot or do not take part in this creative communication environment.

This new relationship is generally premised on two fundamental points. The first point is that the Internet has provided a means of conducting new economic relationships through enhanced opportunities for purchasing goods and services and as an additional advertising channel. This also indirectly affects a change in values. However, non-economic activities, as the second point, are more directly influenced by the Internet. One such example of a non-economic activity is the creation of an Internet-based community through which people can freely exchange valuable information. Many of these communities have become famous among Internet users, highly regarded and often utilized when people seek practical information for economic purposes. One particularly appropriate example of a non-economic activity that values information is the creation of Linux, the free operating system. Although this information-gathering process can be deemed a non-economic activity, it directly influences economic relationships through the Internet.

In our analysis of the inherent underlying premises of the “digital divide”, especially in today’s Japan, the question persists as to whether utopian ideals can be achieved through the Internet and whether a “digital divide” actually exists or has the potential to exist in Japan. Questioning these premises also signifies a change in values, as the Internet in Japan is mainly used for entertainment or business-related purposes. As the use of the Internet increasingly leans towards more economically related activities?engendering a shortage in the range of non-economic activities-the utopian plan, and through it, the concept of the “digital divide” is becoming more unrealistic. However, some sense of altruism still remains in Internet communities, especially among computer technologists, as many of them continue to freely provide freeware and shareware-based computer programs and know-how on Internet.

In order to gauge if the utopian ideals regarding the Internet and the “digital divide” as defined above exist through the Internet in Japan, our survey also sought to assess whether non-economic activities extend from computer technologists to other Internet users. However, prior to addressing this question, we must first examine if non-economic activities can actually be so influential that they can bring about changes in values and society.

** Not available online:Table 5-1 Cross-reference (Non-economic activity and social values) 

The exchange of information among people is an essential component of non-economic activities. As shown in Table 5-1 (Cross-reference [Non-economic activity and social values]), it is obvious that such activities are relevant to engendering sympathetic responses to certain opinions and values that encourage citizens to take part in social innovations. Furthermore, expectations of providing and receiving information are certainly relevant to such values and opinions. Therefore, this in turn demonstrates that the wider distribution of non-economic activities can lead to actual social innovation.

** Not available online: Table 5-2 Cross-reference (Job type, specialists)  

In addition, in comparing skill levels among Internet users, we can also assess how familiarity with computer technology influences values and opinions regarding the Internet. For the purposes of this discussion, we have assumed that specialists who have high computer literacy levels are somewhat similar to computer technologists. In analyzing our survey data, we initially examined the confidence levels that users have in information that is provided through the Internet. Our results indicate that users generally have confidence levels in the information provided through the Internet similar to those of other major media channels such as television and newspapers. However these results must be interpreted with caution, as this survey was targeted towards people who could be considered heavy Internet users. On an average, 28.3% of total survey respondents trust the Internet as an information resource. In examining this more closely, we found that an above-average level, 32.4%, of specialists with high computer literacy skills trust the Internet. However, we also found that 41.7% of artists and designers and other self-employed people also indicated that they trust the Internet, as well as 33.7% of office workers. The percentages of people who declared that they trust the Internet are higher among these occupational types than the percentage demonstrated by specialists with high ability.

In looking further into employment classification, 31.1% of those users who identified themselves as being specialists in terms of occupation demonstrated confidence in the Internet, and 30.0% of these people also indicated that they trust the Internet. These differences are not statistically significant, and they show that confidence in the Internet is only a necessary condition but not a sufficient condition. Therefore, we are unable to conclude at this point if technical specialists, those with occupations such as artists, and office workers take part in non-economic activities and creative communication through the Internet.

** Not available online: Table 5-3 Cross-reference (Employment and social values) 

We have already seen that the exchange of information through the Internet can be relevant to non-economic activities and creative communication, however, upon comparing different occupational classifications, we were unable to find any statistically significant difference concerning this exchange. We note from the responses to our survey that people that are educated as specialists exchange information more often than average, yet no statistically significant differences were observed. We also found that specialists with high levels of computer literacy exchange information more often than the average Internet user (“average” in terms of our survey), yet this factor as well did not prove to be statistically different either. Therefore, we can conclude that the Internet users whom we surveyed already have the potential to realize non-economic creative activity. However, concurrently, this also suggests the existence of a gap between Internet users who can (and do) take part in creative communication and people who do not use the Internet. 
On one level, this dichotomy, between those that actively can and do use the Internet and those who do not exemplifies a potentially serious problem in terms of Internet-related skills and the relationship to other occupational skills. However, perhaps more importantly, it suggests that definitions of the “digital divide” that have been used to date-mainly based on economic characteristics-do not fully explain the true nature of the digital nature. Thus, in this sense, we need a more realistic assessment of social, economic, and environmental elements that make up the “digital divide”.
 

6. The Library Use Divide: Library Use Attitudes of Internet Users 

Libraries are regarded as one of the major social devices that solve the information divide and contribute to the realization of democratic society. Given that meaning, it is important to consider the factor of the “library use divide” as another feature of discussions concerning the digital divide.
 “User studies” (referred to as “library user studies” below) are one form of information behavior studies in the field of library and information science. Library user studies concentrate on the mental attitudes of library users (including non-users and possible users). However, these are limited for the following reasons.

1) Without considering library use as a special form of information behavior, there have been few studies questioning the relationship between library use and other information behavior.

2) Many studies presuppose the “rational” information-seeking subject and focus only on “rational” information-seeking behavior (One exception is the discussion concerning “library anxiety,” which is regarded as one mental factor that blocks library use [Jial et al, 1996]. But its method or status of analysis remains inadequate.).

3) They pay little attention to the divide between areas that have or do not have fully developed library-use culture, especially in terms of the divide in library use attitudes, which is the starting point of library information literacy (library-use ability to conduct information seeking activities).

Considering the above problems, our survey included questions regarding library-use attitudes. One question was: Please tell us your thoughts about how you have used libraries (public libraries, university libraries, or school libraries) up to now and at the present time, as well as your opinions about their use. Unfortunately, many respondents interpreted the word “library” to mean “public libraries”. However, for those who were not students, it might be highly possible that their main library of us is indeed a public library.

From the survey, we made other such discoveries as follows:

1) The number of those who rely on information from the Internet more than that from the libraries is overwhelming (97.5%).

2) When they are not satisfied with the information that they gain from the Internet, 13.0% of our respondents indicated that they go to libraries, while almost nobody makes a phone call or sends an e-mail message to the library reference desk. They seem to have no idea that libraries can be used in this manner. This data would make for an interesting comparison with library use in foreign countries.

3) Reliance on librarians is very low (4.6%).

4) It is natural that library users (determined to be those who go to the library more than once a month, or 14.6% of our total respondents) have higher library-use attitudes than non-library-users. For example, the former access the Online Public Access Cataloguing (OPAC) system through the Internet from their home or their workplace and have found information that is useful in their daily lives. Furthermore, they have been able to find materials that have had an impact on their lives at the library more often than the latter. This divide can be circular.

5) Although we found that the library-use attitudes of Internet users in Japan are extremely low, we could discern some tendencies. For example, among respondents with high education levels (those who have graduated from university), we found that women have higher levels of library-use attitude compared with that of men.

Library use culture in Japan is said to be 10 years’ behind than that of North America, and we have confirmed it from this survey. In a country such as Japan, where library-use culture has not quite firmly taken hold yet, the widespread use of the Internet can be considered an obstacle to the improvement of library-use attitudes or library information literacy. If this is the case, “non-diffusion of the Internet” does not promote such an information literacy divide, but the “spreading of the Internet” itself does. From this point of view, we can say again, that concepts of “computer literacy equals information literacy” or “technological determinism” are only two examples of a one-sided view of the “digital divide” theory.
 

7. Exploring the political digital divide 

As discussed above, to reach a fuller understanding of the concept and impact of the “digital divide”, we must go beyond socio-economic and access issues to explore a wide range of underlying social, economic, and philosophical factors. The evidence presented above suggests that IT and inherent technologies that define its use, may serve as means for expressing these underlying elements in clearer, more personal ways than previous media technologies.
The inherent concept of the “digital divide” itself suggests that use of and access to the information society should be made possible on a fair and equitable scale. As optimistic as this may be, it cannot be ignored that IT utilization differs in terms of Internet diffusion rates and the role that is played by IT in society. On deeper, level, people’s attitudes towards IT in particular and their overall social and cultural value systems, as expressed through information and communications media channels, play a decidedly more integral role in reconceptualizing the digital divide. Rather than a cause that stimulates major social change, or an effect of major policy changes on varying governmental and social levels, the true nature of the information society lies in how people use it to communicate their thoughts and gather (and potentially act on) information. As with other media channels, those with access choose to utilize information technologies as an additional means of communication, given cost, speed, and accessibility. IT utilization is becoming more of a personal and individual expression of everyday values. 

The possibilities of online politics 

When the Internet first started to be used for political communications and information provision in the U.S. in the mid-1990s, hopes for its utilization as a means to foster increased political participation and interest were high. At that time, the concept of a “cyberspace” environment wherein the free exchange of political information and opinions could occur in an unrestricted environment promised to revitalize democratic participation opinions (Rash, 1995; Grossman, 1995; Rheingold, 1994). However, scholars cautioned that low diffusion rates and education in using the Internet (Hill and Hughes, 1998), as well as overoptimistic predictions about the power of this new technology to effect democratic change (Margolis and Resnick, 2000) were potential stumbling blocks.

As the number of political actors, including politicians, political parties, and later, various levels of government, increasingly came online, empirical studies relating to actual interest in using the Internet for political purposes have unearthed certain caveats. In their 2001 publication shortly following the U.K. general election, the iSociety reported that political actors are not making full use of the potential of the Internet to include especially the younger generation in the political process (Crabtree, 2001).  Furthermore, according to a report released in 2002 by the United Nations, governments in a number of different countries vary widely in terms of the government services that are provided through the Internet for reasons such as telecommunications infrastructure, transactional capabilities, and political and administrative priorities (UN, 2002). These empirical reports suggest that the use of the Internet for political and e-government purposes is only in its beginning stages.

Political actors in Japan have been present on the Internet since 1995 when a group of candidates vying for seats in the 1995 Upper House election first established individual political web-sites. Despite low Internet penetration in Japan in the mid-1990s (less than 5% of the total population), political parties soon followed suit, and by 1996, all major political parties were online. By contrast, individual politicians and candidates were rather slow to incorporate the Internet into their activities and attention to their use of the Internet has mainly occurred during election campaign periods. Even by 1998, only 83 members of both the Upper and Lower Houses of the Diet (the Japanese national legislature) had web-sites, although by 2001, this figure rose dramatically to 455 (Japan Internet Association, 2002). This can no doubt be attributed to Japan’s “Internet boom” in 2000, brought about by falling access and hardware costs, increased access to mobile services, and greater popular attention paid to the Internet on the social and governmental level. A similar increase has been seen in the number of local governments (prefectures, cities, towns, and villages) present on the Internet. Since 1998, the number of local cities, towns, and villages, with web-sites has grown from 41% in 1998 to 66% in 2001 (Japan Internet Association, 2001). At the same time, their range of services has also expanded with many offering administrative services such as ordering official documents through their web-sites.

As the number of users in Japan has increased in terms of the general population, what they can find on the Internet in terms of information and what they can do on the Internet in terms of communications has also greatly expanded. Political actors and various government levels are slowly becoming aware of the Internet’s potential in these two areas. However, as shown from the results of our survey, offering political information and introducing communicative features in this regard do not automatically mean that users will be interested in or partake of these services at this time. Furthermore, our results suggest that users’ pre-formed opinions and views affect how they will use the Internet for these purposes. We have assessed that interest levels in using the Internet for these purposes are rather low in general, however, especially in terms of interaction through the Internet, online political or administrative behavior may gradually evolve.

Interest level in political information on the Internet 

Our survey included a number of questions regarding the overall level of interest in using the Internet for political information. In three separate areas of our survey, we asked respondents if they had experience in accessing politically oriented web-sites (such as those maintained by their own elected representative, those related to political parties, and those of well-known politicians). As shown in Table 7-1 (Interest in politically oriented web-sites) of the 569 responses to our survey, only a small percentage of respondents indicated interest in the web-sites of their elected representative (7.4%), however, interest in web-sites related to political parties and those maintained by well-known politicians was noticeable higher at 18.3% and 14.2%, respectively.

** Not available online: Table 7-1  Interest in politically oriented web-sites 

Upon closer analysis, we found that this level of interest in accessing political information on the Internet was not dependent on any demographic variables except for that of education (Table 7-2 Demographic analysis [interest in politically oriented web-sites]).
  
** Not available online: Table 7-2  Demographic analysis [interest in politically oriented web-sites] 

In order to assess the level of interest in using the Internet as a means of providing political information as well as if such information led to some type of action undertaken by viewers, the survey asked those respondents who had experience in accessing the three different types of politically oriented web-sites if they accessed such sites out of interest, if they took some form of related action after viewing the sites, and if they were interested in accessing such sites in the future. Table 7.3 (Action after viewing politically oriented web-sites) shows what users did after accessing politically oriented web-sites.

** Not available online: Table 7-3  Action after viewing politically oriented web-sites 

Although between roughly one-third of respondents indicated that they had accessed these three types out of interest, few users indicated the desire to visit the same sites again. These figures may indicate that respondents viewed the sites merely out of curiosity or that they were not satisfied with the information or features that were contained on the sites. Furthermore, the fact that not all elected representatives have web-sites at this time may also have a bearing on these figures. Surprisingly, a higher percentage of respondents revealed that they took some form of action because of the information that they viewed on the web-sites, especially those who visited political party web-sites.  Although we did not ask more detailed questions regarding what type of action they took, these figures suggest that users either interact with the Internet in this regard or that the information that they view on the Internet has some bearing on their politically oriented activities.
 

Is politics important? 

 As shown above, choosing to access or view politically oriented web-sites to a large extent depends on users’ actual desire to gather or act on such information through the Internet. As there is a certain amount of choice involved on the part of users, in our survey, we chose to assess their “offline” value orientations and opinions regarding various aspects of politics to provide some clues as to their online behavior.
The results to other questions concerning offline political opinions revealed some very interesting results from the Internet users who completed our survey. In response to the question, “Do you think political and social problems are important in your own individual life (or do you want such things to be important in your life)”, only 25% indicated “yes”. This low percentage may explain the lack of interest in viewing politically oriented web-sites. However, when cross-tabulating these results with demographic variables, we found that gender somewhat affects this figure: Almost 80% of our female respondents indicated that they did not consider politics or social problems important in their daily lives, as opposed for slightly over 70% of men.

Furthermore, respondents were also decidedly pessimistic concerning the future state of domestic politics. Almost 90% of those who completed the survey responded that they were either somewhat or decidedly pessimistic concerning the Japanese political system, as shown in Table 7-4 (Social outlook). The dissatisfaction level figures are markedly low when compared to their outlook concerning other aspects of Japanese society.

** Not available online: Table 7-4  Social outlook 

A cross-tabulation of these results with demographic variables suggested that these figures are related to age in terms of political outlook. Comparatively youthful survey respondents in the 25-to-29 and 30-to-34 age brackets demonstrated relatively higher optimism levels (18.0% and 8.5%, respectively) than those respondents in the older age brackets. Only 10% of 35-to-39-year-olds and 5.7% of 40-to-44-year-olds indicated that they had an optimistic outlook regarding politics in the future.

These pessimistic attitudes regarding politics in Japan were also reflected in the answers that respondents gave concerning the major problems that are facing Japan today. More than half (56.8%) of respondents indicated that they felt that political ethics and morals are a particularly important problem in Japan. In terms of demographics, although responses by women to this question were evenly split, close to two-thirds of the male respondents noted that this is an area of concern in Japan. Over 60% of full-time workers were also concerned about political ethics and morals, compared to approximately half of those employed part-time.

The negative outlook on domestic politics that respondents have may partially be due to their image of politicians in general. The respondents to our survey had an extremely negative image of Japanese politicians, as shown in Table 7-5 (Images of politicians).

** Not available online: Table 7-5  Images of politicians 
 

If not now, when?  

Related to the above, we also asked respondents regarding their opinions of the effectiveness of the Internet as a current and future means of communicating information exchanging opinions regarding domestic politics and community-building efforts, e-government-related services, and electronic voting. We found that rather low percentages of respondents were interested in currently using the Internet for political and community-building efforts (10% and 21.8%, respectively, although respondents indicated some interest in using the Internet for these purposes in the future (27.2% and 38%, respectively). Although these figures were assessed against demographic variables such as gender, age, education, and employment, we found that the only statistically significant variable that affected these responses was education level. In contrast, respondents were much more interested in using the Internet in the future for obtaining official paperwork, possibly through e-government services, and electronic voting.  More than 60% of our respondents indicated that they would like to try these two services through the Internet if the technology continues to advance.
 

Conclusion 

 Although our survey enabled us to clarify a number of aspects regarding the political use of the Internet, it also raised certain questions regarding what is offered or provided on the Internet and passive versus active use of terms of political information. The overwhelmingly negative outlook held by our survey respondents regarding politics in general quite likely affects their choice to view politically oriented web-sites and to currently use the Internet to gather political information or conduct political communications. However, as noted above, when asked about the potential future of the Internet for political information and communications, our respondents were slightly more optimistic. In direct relation to their daily lives and what they could do on the Internet in terms of traditional political participation (electronic voting) or with regard to e-government services, they were decidedly more upbeat. People are interested in using the Internet for what it can do to possibly facilitate their lives and express their political will. 

Ultimately, claims that the Internet can be used for other varied forms of political action presuppose that the public itself wants more channels for political participation and that it considers the Internet to be a desirable vehicle for such activities, especially when compared to other channels for political information. The speed, growing ease of use, increasing levels of computer literacy, and reduced access costs undoubtedly provides potential for enhanced public information dissemination and communication. Through our survey research, we found that these opportunities certainly exist. However, at present, the gap between the possibilities for utilizing the Internet for these purposes and actual practical application suggests the existence of a “political digital divide”. This “political digital divide” is not based on access or other factors that directly relate to IT, but rather, the values, opinions, and attitudes that already exist among users.
 

8. The “digital divide” theory seen from a viewpoint of existence and communication 

Kenji Kawashima, a religious studies scholar, administered a survey concerning Internet use to various churches of the United Church of Christ in Japan in January 2002 (Kawashima 2002). Of the 736 valid responses he received, he found that 320 churches were using the Internet with 179 planning to use it in the future. While a number of churches used the Internet for activities such as counseling, consultation, etc., there were 237 churches with no plans to use the Internet.

Many of the churches cited general reasons not to use the Internet such as being short of staff, age, technical difficulties, and economical reasons. A number of churches (17) replied that the use of the Internet was incongruent with their lifestyles and 11 churches cited theology. In more detail, the lifestyle-related reasons included: “No time. I do not want to become busier than I am right now” (13 cases) and “I want to calmly consider things rather than be chased by machines. I plan to do my job within the required limits, using the telephone, mail, radio, and television”.

Theological reasons were: “I am worried that using a personal computer and the Internet may influence my soul, my human relations, etc., which is not good” and “I am worried that there may be evil in obtaining information without feelings or have the experience transmitting communications at rapid speed which cannot be compared with a letter”. There were also five opinions that assert the importance of orally discussing issues in meetings, evidenced by replies such as “Just by getting together face to face, I think that’s the way pastoral work and missions are formed”. Similar opinions are reported by Kawashima in a 1997 investigation of U.S. churches (Kawashima, 1997).

When saying that the “digital divide” is an issue, we can also say that social classes, literacy, and economical situations, etc. can be considered causes. In those cases, we think that it is disadvantageous if we cannot access IT and we think that is a problem. However, when an electronic network is seen from the viewpoint of a lifestyle or theology, problems of the lack of the body, experience, and the context, as Dreyfus points out, do not remain problems of an argument-dimension, but become prevention factors of a lifestyle on an existence level and the mission in practice (Dreyfus 2002). In this case, the “digital divide” exists as another reason and value is realized by not using IT.
On the other hand, many churches are using e-mail for consultation and they find missionary meaning through its use. This demonstrates that in terms of communication on an electronic network, two aspects can be realized. On one hand, it can be considered a medium in which communication involving values or feelings is possible, and, on the other hand, it is thought that it is a faulty form of communication because it lacks physical presence, experience, and context. These two conflicting aspects must be further deliberated further in order to assess the relationship between the human condition and the “digital divide”.

Research concerning mental communication using an electronic network exists in areas other than religion. Focusing on an American-based Internet newsgroup, Denzin (1998) analyzes a number of message and found many instances of the retelling of self-histories and that it was one place where therapy was conducted. Finn (2000), a psychologist, also summarized various examples of on-line therapy. In Japan, Kawamura et al (1999) studied “web-site diaries” and other have focused on “e-mail counseling” (Muto, 2002). These studies can be deemed situations where we consider issues by applying self-narrative theory through reconstructing self narratives by exchanging experiences (Asano, 1998). 
However, in order to appropriately consider this problem, we need to revisit what we think about so-called “virtual communities” as well as what methodologies can be employed. Parks (1996) refers to the virtual community as a place where human relationships with a certain amount of strength exist on an electronic network through value-laden exchange and consultative actions.

We could simply call these actions “interaction” and “human relations” without further consideration. Moreover, when some “virtual communities” are places where people have 
joined together for a common purpose, rather than the word “community”, “association” is more appropriate, according to political scientist Mciver's definition of communities in face-to-face societies(Mciver, 1977). If these communities are interpreted as part of a constructed new world, it also has a sense of the American pioneering spirit (Yasukawa and Sugiyama, 1999; Endo, 1998). As the Internet becomes a more “ordinary” form of communication, we need to all the more consider how values and styles of communication in the face-to-face world are reflected on the Internet. In terms of methodology, significant studies are being carried out using qualitative data analysis, content analysis, interview methods, and other forms of analysis to examine this field. However, such techniques do not analyze values that are composed outside text and they cannot analyze the readers’ mentality through content analysis. For those reasons, we conducted a survey regarding communication exchanges in values, emotion, and experiences.

The results of our survey showed that the tendency, which aims at values and feeling communication at a fixed rate, was in the Internet. At the same time, not only non-users but also Internet users recognize that there are differences between face-to-face or physical meetings and Internet communication. When we read the results concerning consultation acts using the Internet, we understand that 40.9% of our respondents have asked for advice using the Internet and 52.4% have given advice (simple totals). This means that this ratio of people use the Internet for serious consultation. For the survey question that asked who users turned to for advice, replies for “family” were 57.3%, “intimate friends”, 74.6%, and “acquaintances on the Internet”, 18.1%. The Internet basically supports face-to-face relationships and a certain number of Internet-based relationships.

The result of our questions regarding experience exchanges such as replies to “Q16 1. Writing about things such as your own experiences in an everyday manner” were 46.2% and to “Q16 2. Being interested in and reading what other people have written about their own experiences” were 57.5%. More than half of the respondents showed interest in experience exchange using the Internet and especially in reading other people’s experiences. The responses to “Q16 3. Writing about things that you like or that have made an impression on you” were 38.1% and “Q16 4. Reading what other people have written about things that they like or that have made an impression on them” were 45.5%. These results also show their interest. In the results to our question regarding the future, namely, “In the future, do you want to have the opportunity to do the following on the Internet? Please indicate as many choices as apply,” though the rate fell as a whole, respondents demonstrated similar tendencies and showed more interest in “Q16 5. Read words or passages that can have an impact on you” (the percentage rose from 19.7% to 36.2%). We can conclude that there are a certain number of people who intend to conduct value-oriented communication and experience exchanges. There is a value-emotion oriented group among Internet users.

Though there is a value-emotion oriented group among Internet users, they are not completely affirmative to the Internet. The percentage of respondents who affirmatively answered “Q20 3. Although I cannot see the other person's face, I think that it's easy to communicate on the Internet,” was 59.9%. This may seem like a positive characteristic of the medium, but replies for “Q20 11. Misunderstandings can arise [during communications through the Internet],” were 54.8%, to “Q20 10. I have had situations on the Internet where I feel uneasy because I do not know the person with whom I am communicating” were 41.5%, and to “Q20 8. Interpersonal relationships through the Internet are different from face-to-face relationships” were 41.1%. In brief, as an expression of the opinions of Internet users, they agreed with the benefits of the Internet and the possibilities for value-emotion communication, but they pointed out the differences between the Internet and face-to-face communication. Even among the value-emotion oriented group, replies to “Q20 11. Misunderstandings can arise [during communications through the Internet]” and “Q20 8. Interpersonal relationships through the Internet are different from face-to-face relationships” are significantly high (chi test p<0.05). On one hand, they are value-emotion oriented and they feel the lack of the body, experience, and the context of Internet communication.

If we look at the complex results of our survey, we can understand that there is an aspect of existence in Internet communication. Therefore, economic and technology-centered points of view, as argued in previous sections, are not enough to analyze the entire problem of “digital divide” theory.

References 

Asano, Tomohiko (1998) “Monogatari Ryoho ha Shakai-Kagakuteki Jikoron ni Naniwo Ataeruka,” Gendai Shakai Riron Kenkyu, pp.55-64. 
Crabtree, James (2001) “Whatever happened to the E-Lection: A survey of voter attitudes towards new technology during the 2001 election,” Reported compiled for the iSociety (Industrial Society). Available at www.theworkfoundation.com/pdf/Election designed1.pdf Access date June 1, 2002. 
Denzin, N.K. (1998)  “In search for the inner child: Co-dependency and gender in a cyberspace community,” In G. Bendelow & S.J. Williams. (eds), Emotions in  Social Life, New York: Routledge, pp.97-119. 
Dreyfus, Hubert L. (2001), The Internet, London: Routledge.   
Endo, Kaoru (1998) “Shakaigaku ha Network Shakai wo Do miruka? -Network Shakai no Etosu to Genjitsu,” Presentation at Kanto Shakai Gakkai, 2002. 
Finn, Jerry (eds) (2000)  Human Service Online: A New Arena for Service Delivery, New York: The Haworth Press Inc. 
Grossman, Lawrence (1995) The Electronic Republic: Reshaping Democracy in the Information Age. New York: Penguin Books. 
Hill, Kevin A., and John E. Hughes (1998) Cyberpolitics: Citizen Activism in the Age of the Internet. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield, Inc. 
Hindman, Douglas Blanks (2000) “The rural - urban “digital divide”, in Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly, 77-3, Autumn 2000, 549-560. 
Japan Internet Association (2001) Intanetto hakusho 2001  (Internet White Paper 2001). Tokyo: Japan Internet Association.  
Japan Internet Association (2002) Intanetto hakusho 2002  (Internet White Paper 2002). Tokyo: Japan Internet Association.  
Jial, Q. G., Onwuegbuzie, A. J. and Lichtenstein (1996) A. A. Library Anxiety: Characteristics of 'At-risk' College Students. Library and Information Science Research. 18-2, pp.151-163. 
Kawashima, Kenji (1997) “Internet no Syukyo teki Katsuyo no Genjo to Kanousei-America Kirisuto-kyokai no Jirei Kenkyu,”  Jinbungakubu Kiyo, vol. 9, Keisein Jogakuendaigaku, pp.53-74. 
Kawashima, Kenji (2002) http://kawashima.m78.com/ retrieved on September 26, 2002 
Kawaura, Yasushi, Yamashita, Kiyomi, Kawakami, Yoshiro (1999) “Hito ha Naze Web Nikki wo Kaki-tsuzukeru noka: Computer Network ni Okeru Jiko Hyogen,” Syakai Shinrigaku Kenkyu,vol.14, pp.133-143. 
Maciver, Robert M. (1970) Community, London: Frank Cass Publishers.  
Margolis, Michael, and David Resnick (2000)  Politics as usual: The Cyberspace “Revolution”. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 
Muto, Seiei (ed.) (2002) Mail Counseling: Gendai no Esupuri No.418, Shibundo. 
Parks R. Malcolm (1996) “Making Friends in Cyberspace”, Journal of Computer Mediated Communication.  http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol1/issue4/parks.html 
Rash, Wayne R. (1997) Politics on the Nets. New York: W.H. Freeman and Company. 
Rheingold, Howard (1994) The Virtual Community: Finding Connection in a Computerized World. London: Minerva. 
United Nations (UN) Division for Public Economics and Public Administration and the American Society for Public Administration (2002) “Benchmarking E-government: A Global Perspective”. Available at www.unpan.org/e-government/Benchmarking%20E-gov%202001.pdf Access date: June 25, 2002. 
Yashukawa, Hajime, Sugiyama, Akashi (1999), “Seikatsu Shakai no Johoka,” in Kojima Kazuto (ed.) Koza Syakaigaku 8 Syakai Joho, Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai, pp.73-115. 
 

---

»Get Afrika Connected« 

Vernetzungsgerechtigkeit (iustitia reticulata) und ihre Implementierung 
Rupert Scheule 
Leiter des DFG-Projekts "Entscheidungslehre christlicher Ethik" 
Katholisch-Theologische Fakultät 
Universität Augsburg, D-86135 Augsburg 

Es war das Verdienst Kardinal Cajetans, die aristotelisch-thomanische Gerechtigkeitstrias iustitia legalis (Legalgerechtigkeit), iustitia commutativa (Tauschgerechtigkeit) und iustitia distributiva (Verteilungsgerechtigkeit) den drei grundlegenden Relationen des menschlichen Zusammenseins zugeordnet zu haben: Die iustitia commutativa regelt die Beziehungen der Einzelnen untereinander, die iustitia legalis bestimmt das Verhältnis des Einzelnen zur Gemeinschaft und die iustitia distributiva begründet die Pflichten des Gemeinwesens gegenüber dem Einzelnen. 
Kardinal Cajetan lebte im 16. Jahrhundert. Er konnte nicht ahnen, dass der zu seinen Lebzeiten gerade einsetzende überaus erfolgreiche Prozess der gesellschaftlichen Ausdifferenzierung, der Entstehung von Subsystemen und Eigenrationalitäten, welchem wir unseren spätmodernen Pluralismus verdanken, eine neue soziale Grundkategorie mit sich brachte: jene des Aus- und des Einschlusses. Denn die Geschichte gesellschaftlicher Ausdifferenzierung lässt sich, von Michel Foucault inspiriert, auch als Geschichte der Ausschlüsse und Gemeinschaftsverweigerung schreiben. So war die »Erfindung der Privatheit« auch ein Ausschluss der Ehefrauen vom öffentlichen Leben, die »Erfindung der Jugend« war auch der Ausschluss einer arbeitsfähigen Altersgruppe vom härter werdenden Arbeitsmarkt wie die »Erfindung des Sozialstaats« im Wegsperren der Kranken und Alten seine »andere Seite« hatte. Meine erste These ist, dass zur ethischen Einordnung der Globalisierung Kategorien wie »Neo-Kolonialismus« und »Dependenz« wenig taugen, stattdessen aber die Kategorie des Ausschlusses viel beitragen kann: Globalisierung ist ein OECD-Phänomen, dessen »andere Seite« der Ausschluss ganzer Weltregionen ist: die Weltwirtschaft würde ein Versinken des afrikanischen Kontinents kaum bemerken (nur Südafrika und einige Küstenregionen sind im weltwirtschaftlichen Maßstab von einiger Bedeutung). 
Der Begriff der Beteiligungsgerechtigkeit, der auf ein Hirtenwort der US-Bischöfe von 1986 zurückgeht, gewinnt vor diesem differenzierungstheoretischen Hintergrund erst seine ganze Plausibilität. Beteiligungsgerechtigkeit (iustitia contributiva) wehrt den Ausschlussdynamiken der Moderne. 
»Vernetzungsgerechtigkeit (iustitia reticulata)« ist nun nicht einfach ein Anwendungsfall der Beteiligungsgerechtigkeit in Bezug auf Kommunikationsmittel, Vernetzungsgerechtigkeit meint neben der konkreten Forderung infrastruktureller und informationeller Gleichberechtigung auch die Forderung einer neuen Organisationsform: es geht nicht mehr darum, teilnehmen zu dürfen am gesellschaftlichen Leben mit seinen horizontalen Tausch- und vertikalen Verteilungsprozessen. Es geht um die Ermöglichung eines neuen organisationellen Typs von gesellschaftlichem Leben: der Netzwerkgesellschaft, die nicht länger auf vertikale Ordnungen setzt und deren Medium und Symbol das Internet ist. 

Die konkreten Schwierigkeiten und verblüffenden Chancen der Implementierung von Vernetzungsgerechtigkeit werden erörtert anhand des Kameruner Projekts »actwid kongadzem«, an dem die österreichische non profit-Organisation VUM maßgeblich beteiligt war. 
 

---

Netzkunst und Digital Divide 

Wolfgang Sützl  
Institut für Neue Technologien 
Brückengasse 8/14, A-1060 Wien  
suetzl@world-information.org  

In diesem Beitrag soll der Frage nachgegangen in wie weit künstlerisch-ästhetische Gesichtspunkte zur Debatte über die Informationsgerechtigkeit beitragen können.  Dabei gehe ich von der von Gianni Vattimo vorgeschlagenen nihilistischen Interpretation Heideggers und Nietzsches aus, in welcher die klassiche Frage der „Wahrheit der Kunst“ von einer  postmetaphysischen Perspektive neu aufgerollt wird. Seit dem "pensiero debole" hat Vattimo eine Philosophie entwickelt, die auf dieser Grundlage der Ästhetisierung als emanzipatorisches Ziel nachgeht. Gerade angesichts der Bedeutung des Visuellen in den neuen Technologien und der Konvergenz zwischen Gebrauch und Gestaltung tritt die künstlerische Auseinandersetzung mit gesellschaftlichen Problemen wie der Informationsgerechtigkeit verstärkt hervor. Die Wirklichkeit dieser Medienwelten ist eine fiktionalisierte Wirklichkeit, in deren Gestaltung das Politische, Technische und Künstlerische eine zusammenhängede und stets unstabile Pragmatik bilden. Dementsprechend zeichnet sich die elektronische Kunst durch ein Naheverhältnis zum Cyber-Aktivismus (Politik) und zur Hacker-Kultur (subversiver Umgang mit Technik) aus.  

Die Überwindung des Digital Divide wird im Rahmen dieses Beitrages damit nicht als klassisches Entwicklungsprojekt begriffen, welche die Informationsarmut zu eliminieren trachtet, sondern als Herausforderung, die ästhetisierten Wissens- und Handlungsformen, welche sich in der neuen Medienkultur herausbilden, für eine emanzipatorische Politik zu nutzen. Es geht also darum, mehr über die fortbestehende Trennung zwischen den politischen Handlungsmöglichkeiten einerseits und den künstlerisch-technischen Gestaltungsvorgängen in den digitalen Medien andererseits herauszufinden. 
 

---

KANN NON-PROPRIETÄRE SOFTWARE EINE LÖSUNG FÜR DEN "DIGITAL DIVIDE" SEIN?   

Karsten Weber  
Europa-Universität Viadrina Frankfurt (Oder)  
Lehrstuhl für Philosophische Grundlagen kulturwissenschaftlicher Analyse  
Postfach 1786, 15207 Frankfurt (Oder)  
kweber@euv-frankfurt-o.de  
  

Abstract   

Non-proprietäre Software (als Sammelbegriff für Software der Free Software Foundation, der Open Source Initiative und anderer Entwicklungen) wird von ihren Verfechtern gegenüber proprietärer Software – als Paradigma werden in aller Regel die Produkte des Unternehmens Microsoft genannt – nicht nur als technisch überlegen, sondern auch als sozial wertvoller angesehen. Diese Ansicht wird mit verschiedenen Argumenten gestützt:  

• die Möglichkeit der freien Verbreitung senke die ökonomischen Hürden des Zugangs zu Software erheblich; 
• die Offenlegung der Quellen und damit des Know-hows erzeuge einen erheblichen Mehrwert, da Wissen und nicht nur Anwendungen verbreitet würden; 
• ebenso würde dadurch Monopolbildung und Marktbeherrschung verhindert;
• durch die breite Entwicklerbasis würden Fehler schneller bereinigt; 
• die kooperative Produktion von Software erzeuge und stärke globale soziale Netzwerke. 

Diese Argumente sprechen prima facie stark dafür, dass non-proprietäre Software eine Lösung des Problems des “digital divide” sowohl innerhalb industrialisierter und entwickelter Staaten als auch zwischen diesen Staaten und Ländern der so genannten Dritten Welt sein könnten.  
Es soll jedoch aufgezeigt werden, dass bei der gegenwärtigen Verfassung der einzelnen Bewegungen im Bereich non-proprietärer Software nicht davon ausgegangen werden kann, dass diese Art der Software Probleme des “digital divide” lösen könnte. Dies gilt sowohl für die Spaltungen innerhalb von Gesellschaften als auch zwischen den verschiedenen Wohlstandsregionen der Welt.  
Im Vortrag wird zunächst eine kurze Beschreibung der gegenwärtigen Situation non-proprietärer Software gegeben; danach wird diese in Bezug auf den “digital divide” analysiert. Dabei wird sich zeigen, dass die Ziele der Bewegungen rund um non-proprietärer Software die Aufhebung jener Spaltung gar nicht als Ziel beinhalten, da sie sich diesem Problem im Wesentlichen nicht wirklich bewusst sind. Dies zeigt sich bspw. daran, dass die Entwicklung von Linux ausschließlich auf State-of-the-Art-Hardware ausgerichtet ist und nicht berücksichtigt wird, dass Menschen in den so genannten Dritte-Welt-Ländern faktisch kaum Möglichkeiten des Zugangs zu solcher Hardware haben. Ein weiteres Problem ist, dass non-proprietäre Software zwar multinational entwickelt wird, doch mitnichten von Multikulturalität gesprochen werden kann: die „Kultur“ non-proprietärer Software baut auf der englischen Sprache auf. Beide Aspekte stellen starke Ausschlussmechanismen dar. Ein dritter solcher Mechanismus ist, dass sich die Bewegungen non-proprietärer Software stark durch ihre Gegnerschaft zu kommerziellen Unternehmen und hier vor allem zu Microsoft definieren. Dies hat eine “us and them”-Mentalität erzeugt, die eigene Rituale und Kommunikationsformen hervorbringt, die Außenstehende nur schwer verstehen und nachvollziehen können.  
Als Fazit kann formuliert werden, dass in der gegenwärtigen Struktur der Bewegungen non-proprietärer Software kaum zu erwarten ist, dass von dort Lösungen des Problems des “digital divide” zu erwarten sind. Dazu sind auch die Demokratie-Defizite jener Bewegungen zu groß.  

---

WAS TRENNT DER DIGITAL DIVIDE? 

Felix Weil  
quiBiq.de D-70565 Stuttgart  
Felix.Weil@quiBiq.de  
www.quiBiq.de  

Mit dem Begriff "Digital Divide" werden mittlerweile eine Vielfalt unterschiedlicher "Teilungen" beschrieben: 

Die meisten sind aus philosophischer Sicht weniger digital motiviert als 
vielmehr 
- ökonomisch: Verfügbarkeit über (digitale) Produktionsmittel 
- sozial: Zugehörigkeit zu (digitale) Nutzergruppen 
- kulturell: Nutzung (digitaler) Ausdrucksformen   

Der Aspekt der Digitalität spielt hier vielmehr eine untergeordnete, systematisch eher uninteressante Rolle: 
- Die Klassen, die früher die Dampfmaschine getrennt hat, trennt heute der Computer? 
- Was früher Gruppenzugehörigkeit geprägt hat, wird heute über das Internet gesteuert? 
- Was früher die abstrakte Kunst war, ist heute die mediale? 

Dann wären auch die ethischen Lösungen einfach übertragbar! 
Die Medien - heute im wesentlichen digital geprägt - besitzen jedoch ein spezifisches, 
trennendes Moment, dass sich von den der Bereiche unterscheidet: 
Medien trennen Präsenz von Absenz, d.h. 
- Die Verfügbarkeit über Medien entscheidet nicht nur über die Möglichkeit 
der Teilnahme an der Welt der Wirtschaft, sondern bereits über die Präsenz des Bedarfes, des Angebotes, der Nachfrage und der zugehörigen Strukturen, und wer nicht darüber verfügt erscheint erst gar nicht im Raum der Wirtschaft  
- Die Zugehörigkeit zu digitalen Nutzergruppen entscheidet über die Präsenz von Anschauungen, Ansichten und Informationen, und wer nicht dazu gehört, muss sich medienwirksam hineinbomben bzw. skandalieren 
- Die Nutzung digitaler Ausdrucksformen entscheidet über die Möglichkeit der prinzipiellen Präsentationsfähigkeit diverser Sachverhalte von zunehmender Bedeutung, und wer nicht darüber verfügt, ist von den zugehörigen Entwicklungen ausgeschlossen 

Die digitalen Habenichtse sind diejenigen, die im Raum der Kommunikation schlichtweg nicht vorkommen, nicht wahr genommen werden, keinen Ort in den Medien finden. 
Die digitale Herrscherklasse bestimmt die mögliche Präsenz von Themen, Anliegen, Ansichten und ihre Verbreitung. 

Die medienethische Herausforderung ist es, die Strukturen für eine jeweils angemessen mögliche Präsenz zu schaffen: Den Raum der Kommunikation so zu gestalten, dass er sinnvoll von Rezipienten begangen werden kann und von Produzenten sinnvoll ausgestattet werden kann. 

---

KULTUR VERSUS GLOBALISIERUNG 
Zur Frage nach den ethischen Konsequenzen informationstechnologisch disponierter Globalisierungsstrategien.  

Klaus Wiegerling  
Universität Kaiserslautern   
Pirmasenserstr. 92  
67655 Kaiserslautern 
Wiegerlingklaus@aol.com   
  

Kultur und Leib sind Orientierungskategorien, die sich durch Anpassungsfähigkeit, aber auch durch Widerstand auszeichnen. Eine Auflösung des Widerstandes führt zum Tod, zum leiblichen ebenso wie zum kulturellen. Kultur ist ein Stabilisierungfaktor für die Gesellschaft, aber auch für den einzelnen. Kultur artikuliert sich wesentlich in Archivierungen und Tradierungen und in Anschlußmöglichkeiten, die sie uns bietet. Kultur ist eine Voraussetzung für die gemeinschaftliche und individuelle Vermittlung. Kulturen zeichnen sich auch dadurch aus, daß sie Ökonomie und Technik Zugriffe auf bestimmte gesellschaftliche Resourcen und Naturresourcen verwehren.Wir erleben zur Zeit, technisch und ökonomisch bedingt, Überlagerungen, Marginalisierungen und Beseitigungen tradierter Kulturen, was weltweit spürbar zu ethischen Konflikten führt.  

Vermag eine Kultur bestimmte ökonomisch, religiös oder weltanschaulich motivierten Außeneinflüsse und Verhaltensweisen nicht mehr zu integrieren, destabilisiert sie sich oder reagiert mit einem mehr oder weniger aggressiven Abwehrkampf. Phänomene kultureller Entfremdung spiegeln sich auch in Veränderungen des Wertekanons einzelner wieder.  

Es gibt weder eine kultur- und inhaltsneutrale noch eine wertneutrale Technik. Moderne Kommunikations- und Informationstechnologien setzen eine bestimmte Kompexität und Abstraktheit der Gesellschaft voraus. Diese Technologien sind nicht jenseits bestimmter pragmatischer und utilitaristischer Ideologien zu verstehen. (T.Froehlich) Eine Gesellschaft kann nur dann von bestimmten Technologien, wie moderne Informations- und Kommunikationstechnologien, durchdrungen werden, wenn sie entsprechend disponiert ist, das heißt eine entsprechende Abstraktheitsstufe erreicht hat. So setzt beispielsweise die Durchsetzung und Akzeptanz gentechnologischer Praktiken ein abstrakteres Verhältnis zum Leib voraus. Jede Technik verändert und manipuliert Gesellschaftsverhältnisse und Lebenszusammenhänge, zuletzt auch das Ethos einer Gesellschaft.  

Es ist ein Strukturmerkmal der neuen digital disponierten ökonomischen Weltordnung, daß sie kulturelle Differenz als Behinderung von Markthandlungen begreift. Globalisierung kann nur bei gleichzeitiger Markthomogenisierung vorangetrieben werden. Dies setzt voraus, daß die Standards des Austauschs und der Konsumorientierung vom Leitmarkt, und das ist allein der angloamerikanische, vorgegeben werden. Sichtbar wird dies beispielsweise in der zunehmenden „kein sprachliches Korrektiv“ (Whorff) mehr zulassenden Einsprachigkeit des globalen Commerciums.  

Kulturelle Nivelierung und Markthomogenisierung sind komplementäre Aspekte ein und desselben Vorgangs. Märkte sind erst dann erschlossen, wenn kulturelle Differenzen so marginalisiert sind, daß sie den freien Markt nicht behindern. Da mediale Technologien zwar nicht inhalts- und wertneutral sind,  aber so definiert werden, sind sie das geeignete Mittel der ökonomischen Welterschließung. Die neue informationstechnologisch gestützte, ökonomische Weltordnung steht weitgehend in Konkurrenz zu anderen – vermeintlich rückständigen – kulturellen Dispositionen.  

Kulturen, die sich nicht auf die Bedingungen des Leitmarktes einlassen, gelten als ökonomische Widerstandsgrößen, die man mit Hilfe medialer Technologien zu brechen versucht. Mediale Technologien formen unser Denken und dienen der Verbreitung von Ideen, die den Leitmarkt prägen.  

Der derzeit informationstechnologisch verschärfte kulturelle Antagonismus stellt Fragen an ethische Universalisierungsstrategien. Da kein ethischer Diskurs auf Universalisierung verzichten kann, muß die Frage fokussiert werden, was Gegenstand einer ethischen Universalisierung sein darf und was nicht.