[NOTE: The following letter was submitted to, but not published by, the Wall Street Journal] August 16, 2000 Letters to the Editor The Wall Street Journal 200 Liberty Street New York, NY 10281 To the Editor, ------------------------------------------ Daniel Askt's 8/9/00 letter, “My Old Computer Can Bridge the Digital Divide” completely misses the mark by trivializing the “digital divide” as a simple matter of whether one has access to a computer. It is about education, not only on how to use a computer, but also on basic literacy. It is about ownership of the media so that underrepresented voices have equal clout in programming and control. It is about access to online services, not only for low-income and minority populations, but also for those in rural areas where access, if it exists, is cost-prohibitive. Most importantly, it is about access to relevant content. If the Internet holds promise for enriching and improving the lives of Americans, it is not because it offers a myriad of shopping and advertising opportunities. The ability to access useful, quality information on health, fair lending practices, educational materials, job openings, and other community specific information makes the potential of the Internet real for everyone. The act of donating a machine is only one part of the overall solution. Buying a new or used computer also entails additional costs for software, training, peripheral equipment, and technical support calls. These necessities for operating a computer are not usually included in the price of a used machine, yet can add a significant hurdle for affordable access. Mr. Askt also talks about “free” Internet access. Despite their promise, such services are still new and vary with regard to quality and terms of service attached. For example, users are required to disclose personal information, obtain credit approval, and face constant marketing – not to mention devoting precious bandwidth to banner ads. Contrary to Mr. Askt's assumption, spending $150 on a machine plus $22 per month for a three-year Internet access charge is a major cost for low-income families. The $250 spent for online access assumes that you have the credit to obtain a service contract, and a telephone with which to go online. This is a false assumption to make. For those able to jump this hurdle, there are tough choices. Computers are still an unfamiliar concept whose value and necessity is not clear for many Americans on fixed-incomes. These families make tough enough decisions daily around food, shelter, and health, and do not need to be chastised for not simply plunking down the money needed to go online. The digital divide is not an amorphous straw man dreamt up overnight for ideological posturing. It is a national and local problem that groups --including libraries, community action agencies and technology centers, schools, churches, government agencies, nonprofits, businesses, and volunteers --across every sector imaginable have been combating with gradual success for as much as 20 years. Access to the Internet and knowledge about the use of computers have become an expectation and an obligation for economic, social, political, and civic participation. That is why public and private sector efforts, such as community technology centers (CTCs), are so critical. President Clinton proposed $100 million this year in support of a CTC grant program that gives a hand up, not a hand out, to technologically underserved communities. It is up to Congress, now, to support this investment in our people. Stating that the “digital divide” is a simple problem addressed by better distribution of surplus equipment and suppressed demand is misinformed and wrongheaded at best. It is repugnant and condescending at worst. Sincerely, Ryan Turner Nonprofits' Policy and Technology Project OMB Watch