The wonders of the internet and the ways we use it never cease to amaze me. As Fawkes and Gregory (2007) point out "there is almost no event or data that cannot be accessed directly from the web, without the need for a gatekeeper."
This was the case last night when we googled the type of engine oil my car needs!! While that may seem an innocuous action, it amply illustrates the breadth and depth of information we now have just a keystroke away.
However, it is alarming to think that those who don't have internet access will not be able to perform this simple action. Kelleher's Digital Divide points out that those who use web and social media technology are moving ever further ahead in knowledge management and learning, in comparison to those who don't. These e-fluentials (Burston-Marsteller PR agency) are increasingly and exponentially powerful and making all the important decisons thus forming the so-called information elite.
While we may think the world wide web pools us all together in one equal group, the reality is that many millions are not yet hooked up. As PR practitioners how well are we catering for them as we race to use social media and get linked to the next big thing? This mirrors the situation 130 years ago when newspaper production became widespread yet many of the population were illiterate. Back then, once again, many were disadvantaged by their inability to use new sources of information.
Agree. This is a really important debate as those who cannot access new media, or choose not to do so, are often the people sought most by those who hire PR teams. Selwyn et al in their article 'Whose Internet is it anyway?' look at why people opt not to go online. There is a big research gap here, possibly made worse by the herd rush within PR/marketing to associate with the 'new paradigm.' Quick snapshot: I was talking to the person who cuts my hair (female, 20s) about how her friends travelling in Australia are doing. She said she had not been texting or e-mailing them as this was not really her thing. I have no idea why she would think this way.
ReplyDeleteAre the people who live in wired societies but choose not to access it another demographic that need to be targeted in more conventional ways? Certain geographies do not have access to the internet due to wealth distribution. If they were to get access it would bring awareness and education perhaps (of what they didn't have more than anything) but would that benefit online promotors trying to sell them something they could not afford anyway? Of course one benefit is in the form of emancipation, for example islamic women blogging about their oppression and abuse in certain locations who previously did not have a voice. I'm not supporting a view one way or another, but the use of technology tends to be equated with socio-economic status.
ReplyDeleteWithout doubt, there is conscious opting-out but many of the population genuinely do not have access or their use is constrained by cultural or social issues.
ReplyDeleteLinks to support groups and other social circles they use are one way that organisations can try to reach them but even trying to get accepted into blogging or communities of interest can be fraught with sensitivities.
My mother has consciously 'opted out' but it doesn't stop her asking me to research and find information for her when she opts in by proxy, and I wonder if that's simply an older generation thing in much the same way as only a 4 year old can programme the DVD recorder.
ReplyDeleteI do agree that there is a race to constantly push new media and it's possibly leaving behind too many of those we're trying to target.