October 1, 2002
Dear
City Council Members:
I
write to respond to a statement made by one Member of the Council: “As people
have more access from home and work, and all the kids have access at school, we
don’t need to subsidize their internet use.”
As your Public Library Manager, I believe implementing this as policy
would greatly reduce the library’s effectiveness for our community, for several
reasons. I also believe you are not
considering a significant section of your constituents who are without any
Internet access except at our public library.
There
are really three components our users are concerned with in using the Internet,
including access, training and content.
While the library understands that our users are primarily concerned
with access, training for users is available at the library, and a few users do
create content for the Internet, posting to various sites usually via
email. I will refer to these three
components as “access”, as we believe that our services cover them all to some
extent. However, the library’s primary
interest is in bringing information to our patrons similar to the way we bring
hardcopy information to patrons in the form of books, magazines, and other
hardcopy artifacts.
Firstly,
our community population does not have universal access.[1] This is evident in the current user base at
the library, with our nine computers being accessed continuously by members of
our community, for both email and research.
Our surveys show that over half of these users do not have access
elsewhere. While the rest do have
access at home, work or school, they respond in the surveys that they come to
the library to get access to subscription based research materials the library
subscribes to, that are too expensive for their personal subscription at home
or work. Also, while doing research in
books and other hard copy materials, users report that at certain times, the
next step in their research is often to do an internet query, and if the
library did not have this service, they would be forced to return home or to
work, do the search, and then return to the library to continue their
research. Many users report that if
library access to the Internet were not available, they would discontinue use
of this library at the point in their research where the Internet became
necessary, and simply return home without finishing their school or personal
research.
The
charge our library accepts is that of public servant. I cannot help but think that Benjamin Franklin had this idea in
mind when he said, “We must all hang together, or assuredly we shall all hang separately.”
He realized the importance of a public library in our democratic system,
implementing the first library. While
the Internet did not yet exist during that time, the idea of a shared culture,
and no-cost shared information for all, regardless of economic station, was
central to his vision. We have to look
to this democratic ideal when we think about public services we provide to our
community, no matter what the tool is.
Otherwise, what is the point of our efforts at all?
I
would like to point you to a report by the National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA) of US Commerce Department from February,
2002.[2] This report does show growing Internet
access within the population. The study
states that overall, many more people have access to the Internet since the
survey was started. For example, “on an
individual
(rather than household) basis, as of September 2001 two-thirds (66.8
percent) of the people in the United States used a computer at home, school
and/or work. The vast majority of those who used computers (80.6 percent) were
also connecting to the Internet.”[3] Therefore, Internet access is stated to be
53.9 percent.[4]
Compared to 1994, where only 24.1 percent of households had a
computer, and 1998, where 42.1 percent had a computer at home, we have seen a large
increase in computer ownership.[5]
And comparing internet access to the
figures above, to figures from 1998 where 26.2 percent had internet access,
there have been dramatically more people getting to the Internet.[6]
While the populace’s increasing home, school and work access to
the Internet is a wonderful thing, our community is not at a point where we can
abandon the rest without access. We are
kidding ourselves if we believe that we do not have the other 46.1 percent to
serve. Too many people still do not have a way to connect for a variety of
reasons and circumstances. There are
many ways to look at our population and their situations. These include distinctions that are
economic, as well as related to age, disability, family type, race, gender,
education level and employment situation.
All of these circumstances affect our constituent’s ability to get
online privately or through school.
What we have is a Digital Divide, between those with access to
information technologies such as the Internet and those without. The NTIA states that, “People without home
computers are almost 1.5 times more likely than home computer owners
to obtain outside Internet access through public libraries or community
centers.”[7] And more importantly, their report finds
that “the data suggest … Americans without access to the Internet at home or at
work are making use of public resources. By providing free access to computers
and the Internet, community access centers have the ability to provide minority
groups, lower income, and lesser educated persons with the same information
tools as other connected Americans.”[8]
Economic
circumstances have a lot to do with our patron’s ability to access the
Internet. The NTIA’s “Falling
Through The Net: Defining the Digital Divide” report analyses the economics of
Internet access. They state that where
a person accesses the Internet has much to do with income. For example, people making $35,000 a year
access the internet more at home, verses those with an income of less than
$35,000 who most often access the internet outside the home.[9] Also, some of the households with computers
do not have internet access because of cost, phone charges, access elsewhere,
concerns about children, education and user friendliness.[10] While there are a few small categories that
we are not concerned with, like lack of time or interest, the rest without
Internet access are all potential library users of the Internet. It is also important to recognize that for
households choosing not to connect to the Internet, though they can afford it,
because of concerns regarding monitoring children, they may look to the library
system to make the internet available during the time their family has young
children at home.
Another
area the public library serves people with special needs has to do with access
for the disabled. For example,
libraries can provide Braille display for those without sight, alternative
keyboard options, voice interfaces, screen magnifiers, and user interfaces more
accessible to those with different disabilities. Many of these solutions are available free or at a low cost and
allow the Library to provide a service that in addition to the Internet access
itself, greatly enhances the ability of those with disabilities to get
online. The Internet can give people
with rare disabilities the chance to connect and exchange information with
others with similar problems. Access to
government and legislative information will also allow those who are disabled
to better participate in our system, via the Internet. In a paper on Internet
access for the disabled, Courtney Deines-Jones discusses the challenges for
librarians:
…Most people with disabilities welcome
library access to the Internet. Many, however, have difficulty using a standard
computer interface. For others, multimedia innovations represent potentially
insurmountable barricades to full Internet access. Some patrons may also find
learning multiple methods of searching to be frustrating or impossible. Most of
these barriers were not consciously built by information and computer
specialists, and many can be overcome if librarians consider both physical and
intellectual access issues when they plan their access options. [11]
A
report by Leslie Harris & Associates and Leadership Conference on Civil
Rights Education Fund and the Benton Foundation talks about how the
disabled are online 50% less that the population as a whole.[12]
People with disabilities tend to use
computers and the Internet at rates far below that of the average population.
On average, only 25.4% of the population ages 3 and above with at least one
disability (defined as blind or severe vision impairment, deaf or severe
hearing impairment, difficulty walking or difficulty typing) uses the Internet.
It is important to note that although Internet use is lower overall among those
with disabilities, those with vision or hearing impairments who access the
Internet from outside the home do so at rates comparable to the general
population. Of senior citizens (over age 60), 30% report having a
disability--making them the most represented age group within the population
reporting a disability and the least likely to have access to a computer at
home or out of the home. (Part of the reason only 25.4% of people with
disabilities use the Internet is because the population of people with
disabilities is heavily weighted towards older Americans.)[13]
Since
so many of our patrons are older, retired or disabled, and have difficulty
accessing the Internet from home due to their disabilities and lack of
technical knowledge, the library can give them access and the help they need to
reach information important to them, as well as provide a communication outlet
via email.
According
to the NTIA report, E-mail is one primary way people utilize the Internet. The
study says it“…transcends all demographic and geographic boundaries. E-mail is
clearly the ‘killer application’ of the Internet for the 1990s. Of Americans
who use the Internet, nearly 80 percent (77.9%) use it to send e-mail, and over
half (53.6%) of people with Internet access outside the home use the Internet for
e-mailing. The numbers are consistently high, regardless of income, race,
gender, age, or any other characteristic.”[14] While the library is not necessarily in the
business of providing personal communication tools, we recognize that our
patrons want this application in their Internet use, as we find that half of
our use in surveys is enthusiastically reported to be e-mail. While the surveys show that some of this
email is for personal communication, I also know that some of it regards job
searching, as well as other information research.[15]
Regarding job hunting, the NTIA report on the
Digital Divide states “Over half of unemployed persons (53.9%) using the
Internet at home are searching for jobs online. Outside the home, the same
group is three times more likely to do an Internet job search than the national
average (29.8% vs. 8.5%).”[16] If a person does not have home access, and
is not working, the Public Library becomes their access point. According to a Pew Internet and American
Life Project Data Memo, reporting survey information from the Spring of 2002
about online job hunting, “Fifty-two million Americans have looked online for
information about jobs, and more than 4 million do so on a typical day.”[17] Our community can make job research and
email related to this task possible by retaining access for our patrons.
People
use the Internet is to access online courses and educational materials. And those without private or school access
will continue to fall behind in their educational and career competitiveness. The library does teach some basic computer
use courses, and offer access to online courses for extended periods, during
certain hours. I believe this is an
important service to offer our patrons to reduce the difference between those
with private access and those without it.
For those with access, the NTIA report tells us that “pursuing online
courses and school research is equally popular inside and outside the home
(36.1% and 38.8%, respectively).”[18]
Another Pew Internet and American Life
Project Data Memo, “Use of the Internet at Major Life Moments,” talks about how
“fourteen million American Internet users who got more education or training
for their career in the past two years say their use of the Internet was
crucial or important in upgrading their skills.
[19] The memo goes on to report that the internet
was critical to their purchasing of cars, dealing with family illnesses,
choosing colleges and schools, making major financial or investment decisions,
changing jobs and finding places to live.[20]
Race
and family make up also are indicators of Internet access or PC ownership. Some races have higher Internet access, as
do some family types, while others have lower access. In serving our community well, we must consider those users less
likely to have Internet access. The
NTIA study shows the following: “…usage
varies by race/origin, ranging from high levels of use by Asians/Pacific
Islanders (65.0%) and Whites (63.5%) to lower usage levels by American
Indians/Eskimos/Aleuts (53.2%) to Hispanics (48.7%) and Blacks (47.4%).
Breakdowns by type of household also reveal differing usage rates, ranging from
married couples with children (63.4%) to single-parent households with
children, either male-headed (55.2%) or female-headed (46.4%) families.”[21] Since our community has large percentages of
people in each of these demographics, we must think about the effect removing
our Internet access will have on these patrons.
The
NTIA report concludes that “In sum, the most important reasons why certain
households have never used the Internet is that they ‘don't want it’ or it is
too expensive. Although the former is the more important reason overall, the
cost factor dominates among low-income groups, Hispanics, single-parent
families, the youngest householders, and the unemployed. Policymakers should
therefore consider the role of cost as a deterrent to expanding online access.”[22] We have people in each of these categories
in our community and it is imperative that we serve all of our community in the
ways they need access to information, whether that information is contained in
printed form as a book, in a subscription service over the internet, or simply
to provide access to email for personal reasons. The library levels many differences within our community, by
providing information tools for those in school, working, and retired.
Michael
Powell, Chair of the Federal Communications Commission repeatedly stated in
numerous speeches in the spring of 2001, "I think there is a Mercedes divide.
I'd like to have one; I can't afford one."[23] What this lingering notion does not take
into account is how Internet access is not a luxury item to be given to those
who have not earned it, but rather a tool instrumental in learning about and
understanding our world as we live it today, similar to the role hardcopy
materials have played in learning for students since Franklin made the first
library. In addition, access to the Internet makes possible democratic
participation and communication spanning time and place, much the way phone
access did when it first arrived as a new technology. The suggestion is not to give the public free computers and
Internet service at home, but rather to give shared free access, at public
institutions so that online information is available for those who want
it. We also serve our patrons in an
important way by providing interactive research facilities for those doing combination
research using virtual and hard copy resources, as well as subscription based
services too expensive for individuals in our community, regardless of private
access.
As
Ben Franklin said, “He that lives upon hope, will die fasting.” We cannot live on hope that the other 46.1
percent of us will get access to the internet or somehow find a way to bridge
the gap between themselves and those more fortunately accessing the internet at
home, work or school. The data,
nationally and locally derived, support these conclusions. We must actively participate in reducing the
difference between rich and poor, privileged and disadvantaged that the Digital
Divide amplifies. I strongly recommend
our community continue support for Internet access through our Public Library
system indefinitely, for the economic and intellectual health of our users as
well as the future of our democracy.
[1] For my hypothetical report
to the City Council, I called the Albany, California Public Library reference
desk on 9/28/02 to ask for their perspective on this subject. The Reference Librarian told me that they
survey use, and report that over half of users do not have access elsewhere,
but slightly less than half have it elsewhere.
Those that have Internet access report that many library research
materials are available at the library but not from home, work or school unless
they pay additional fees. In addition,
they come to the library, and while researching in the library’s books and
artifacts, they use the Internet intermittently to do research as needed. The rest, who do not have access anywhere
else report that the library is their primary source of Internet access.
[2] A Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their Use of the Internet. US Commerce Department,
Economics and Statistics Department, National Telecommunications and
Information Administration. February,
2002. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/html/anationonline2.htm.
[3] Ibid, Chapter 1. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/html/Chapter1.htm.
[4] Ibid, Chapter 2. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/html/Chapter2.htm.
[5] A Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their Use of the Internet. US Commerce Department,
Economics and Statistics Department, National Telecommunications and
Information Administration. February,
2001. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/hhs/HHSchartsindex.html,
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/hhs/Charth1.htm.
[7] NTIA,
Falling Through The Net: Defining the
Digital Divide, July 1999. FACT SHEET:
Americans Increasingly Use Internet Outside the Home. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/digitaldivide/factsheets/access.htm.
[8] Ibid.
[9] NTIA,
Falling Through The Net: Defining the
Digital Divide, July 1999. Part II,
Internet Access and Usage. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fttn99/part2.html
[10] Ibid
[12]
Bringing a Nation Online: The Importance of Federal Leadership. Prepared by Leslie Harris & Associates,
July 2002 for the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund and the
Benton Foundation. http://www.civilrights.org/publications/bringinganationonline/nation1.html.
[13]
Bringing a Nation Online: The Importance of Federal Leadership. Prepared by Leslie Harris & Associates,
July 2002 for the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights Education Fund and the
Benton Foundation. http://www.civilrights.org/publications/bringinganationonline/nation1.html.
[14] NTIA,
Falling Through The Net: Defining the
Digital Divide, July 1999. Part II,
Internet Access and Usage. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fttn99/part2.html.
[16] NTIA,
Falling Through The Net: Defining the
Digital Divide, July 1999. FACT SHEET:
Americans Using Internet For Many Tasks. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/digitaldivide/factsheets/usage.htm.
[17] Pew Internet Project Data Memo, “Online Job Hunting,” by Angie
Boyce, Lee Rainie, July 2002. Pew
Internet and American Life Project. http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/pdfs/PIP_Jobhunt_Memo.pdf.
[18] NTIA, Falling Through The Net: Defining the Digital Divide, July 1999. FACT SHEET: Americans Using Internet For
Many Tasks. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/digitaldivide/factsheets/usage.htm.
[19] Pew Internet Project Data
Memo, “Use of the Internet at Major Life Moments,” by Nathan Kommers, Lee
Rainie, May 8, 2002. Pew Internet and
American Life Project.
http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/pdfs/PIP_Major_Moments_Report.pdf.
[20] Ibid.
[21] NTIA,
Falling Through The Net: Defining the
Digital Divide, July 1999. Part II,
Internet Access and Usage. http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fttn99/part2.html.
[22] Ibid.
[23] ”New F.C.C. Chief Would Curb
Agency Reach” By STEPHEN LABATON, New York Times, February
7, 2001, Section C, Page 1, Column 2. http://query.nytimes.com/search/abstract?res=F30B12F7345A0C748CDDAB0894D9404482
or http://lists.indymedia.org/mailman/public/imc-minneapolis-tc/2001-February/000698.html.