2 results
six - Online opportunities
- Edited by Sonia Livingstone, London School of Economics and Political Science, Leslie Haddon, London School of Economics and Political Science, Anke Görzig, London School of Economics and Political Science
-
- Book:
- Children, Risk and Safety on the Internet
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 07 September 2022
- Print publication:
- 18 July 2012, pp 73-86
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
This chapter analyses children's take-up of online opportunities and their outcomes, based on an analysis of the range and types of children’s online activities. There are certain continuities between children’s online and offline worlds – searching for information, entertainment and gaming and social networking online are, to a large extent, extensions or modifications of practices that are located in everyday life, that is, they are not particularly on one side or the other of the ‘real’/‘virtual’ divide. But there is little question that the internet has not added to the breadth and depth of children's everyday opportunities.
The EU Kids Online research has shown that the internet usage of children in Europe involves constant negotiation of opportunities and risks which, if well balanced, will contribute to a meaningful life, a valued identity and satisfactory relations with others (Livingstone and Haddon, 2009a, p 4). Analysing internet usage in terms of opportunities and risks requires its examination through the conceptual lenses of structure and agency. Agency refers to freedom, choice, control and motivation; structure is the set of rules and resources. The starting point of this chapter is children's agency. Identifying children's online activities allows reflection on their knowledge, interests and motivations. Internet usage practices connect the agency side and its social context, within the structure of offline and online activity, which enables certain factors and restricts others.
Research on children's online activities employs the concept of a ‘ladder of opportunities’ (Livingstone and Helsper, 2007; Kalmus et al, 2009) in order to structure the types of activities in which children engage, in a systematic way. It suggests a progression through stages of use. According to this approach, progress is related to increasing skills and more complex internet usage. The ‘ladder of opportunities’ approach is based on the notion that children fall into groups based on the range of the opportunities they use, from information-related sources to communication, to more advanced uses, such as online content creation, practised by only a few.
While this framework has some merits, it should be noted that the analysis of EU Kids Online data in this chapter suggests that some of these activities should be grouped rather than considered in terms of a step-by-step advancement, and also, some activities might fit into more than one group, depending on the backgrounds of the children involved.
nine - Digital divides
- Edited by Sonia Livingstone, London School of Economics and Political Science, Leslie Haddon, London School of Economics and Political Science
-
- Book:
- Kids Online
- Published by:
- Bristol University Press
- Published online:
- 15 July 2022
- Print publication:
- 30 September 2009, pp 107-120
-
- Chapter
- Export citation
-
Summary
Digital divides: beyond access and usage
Since the mid-1990s there has been an increasing interest in the nature and extent of digital divides, and in academic circles the term itself has gradually given way to that of ‘digital inclusion’. In the mid-1990s the ‘digital divide’ has been seen in terms of a dichotomy between the ‘information haves’ and the ‘information have-nots’ (Wresch, 1996), or, in economic terms, the ‘information poor’ and the ‘information rich’ (Webster, 1995). One of the first theorisations of digital divides was based on diffusion theory (Rogers, 1995). It argued that the acquisition of and access to computers and internet equipment is a fundamental criterion for overcoming gaps and inequalities. This understanding of digital divides has been criticised for presenting a limited conceptualisation of the phenomenon, as access to information and communication technologies (ICTs) cannot be considered sufficient for overcoming exclusion from new digital opportunities (Selwyn, 2003, 2004a, 2004b; Warschauser, 2003; Bradbrook and Fisher, 2004). Carpentier (2003) analyses the discourses of academics and politicians concerning digital divides, concluding that three main lines of criticism apply: (1) a limited focus on access instead of kinds of use; (2) an over-simplified dichotomy between ‘haves’ and ‘have-nots’; and (3) a lack of clarity due to the application of the ‘digital divide’ concept to a wide variety of activities.
After 2000, scholars such as Norris (2001) presented a more complex picture of digital divides, discarding the dichotomy between haves and have-nots and at the same time taking into account the quality and efficiency of the use of digital technologies. The literature increasingly allowed more elaborated positions, suggesting a ‘thicker description of the various shades of information and telecommunications inequalities’ (Wilhelm, 2000: 69-70). Social, cultural and educational parameters influence the capability of the individual to make effective use of digital technologies through requisite skills, knowledge and support (van Dijk, 2006). Material resources and economic capacity, socialisation into the dominant culture, technical skills and awareness of the prevalent techno-culture, as well as social networks, are all forces shaping digital divides (Selwyn, 2004a). Policy strategies and regulatory practices also significantly influence the nature of digital divides in specific national and regional contexts (Tsatsou, 2008).
![](/core/cambridge-core/public/images/lazy-loader.gif)