Locked up and left out: Formerly incarcerated people in the context of digital inclusion

Abstract

Digital inequalities disproportionately affect vulnerable and marginalized populations, including formerly incarcerated persons (FIPs), who experience compound vulnerabilities, such as advanced aging, disability, low incomes and education, gender-based marginalization, and in the United States also race and ethnicity. Building on existing frameworks of digital skills and Reisdorf and Rikard’s digital rehabilitation model, this article examines how FIPs navigate the digital society post-incarceration and provides support for the digital rehabilitation model. Examining data from focus groups with FIPs in the United States, we demonstrate that lack of access to ICTs and the Internet during incarceration deprives FIPs of necessary digital skills to navigate the various fields of everyday life (economic, social, cultural, personal, health) that are deeply embedded in digital technologies. Policies regarding digital rehabilitation need to increase limited Internet access during incarceration and provide comprehensive digital skills training tailored to FIPs to allow their full integration into the speed-of-light society.

Beyond Digital Literacy in Australian Prisons: Theorizing “Network Literacy,” Intersectionality, and Female Incarcerated Students

“…As Phelan et al (2020) pointed out, incarceration leads to a loss of culture, family, and community, especially for Indigenous women and this unnecessarily increases the pains and vulnerability of marginalized women. Disconnection from the network society may also frustrate full reintegration into the digital economy upon release, a disadvantage compounded further by factors such as prisoner age and length of sentence (see also Reisdorf & DeCook, 2022). Due to the intersecting axes of difference discussed above, female and especially female Indigenous incarcerated students will need more specialized, personalized information and support than the mainstream prison population in order to ensure they are not further harmed by the experience of isolation and incarceration itself.…”

“…Such programs, I have argued, should also include differentiated, critical network literacy education on using social media safely and responsibly as empowered informed digital citizens. As Reisdorf and DeCook (2022) suggest from the US, emphasizing the concepts of digital rehabilitation as well as digital inclusion, digital literacy must be part of the reentry processes before and after release. In Australia, university-based educators of incarcerated students have worked in partnership with committed prison-based corrections educators to deliver such digital tools and digital skills training across multiple jurisdictions, as previously mentioned.…”

Digital skills and intention to use digital health care and social welfare services among socially marginalized individuals in Finland: A cross-sectional study

“…Trust can influence the adoption and effective use of digital services [16,24,25]. However, certain populations, such as prisoners and people with mental health conditions, may lack trust in technology due to various factors, including privacy concerns and negative experiences [26,27].…”

“…While prior research has explored trust in service providers and the internet [23,27] however, user profiling of digital skills among socially marginalized groups such as prisoners and people with mental health conditions has not been investigated before.…”

Digital Rights, Institutionalised Youths, and Contexts of Inequalities

“…The digital inequalities these youths face are exacerbated by the rapid pace of technological change and are embedded in deep social inequalities (Reisdorf & Jewkes, 2016;Underwood et al, 2013;van Deursen & van Dijk, 2014). Research in different countries highlights digital disadvantage as a central component of social inequalities (Reisdorf & Rhinesmith, 2020) and demonstrates a strong link between children and youth's offline vulnerability and risky digital experiences (El Asam & Katz, 2018;Helsper & Reisdorf, 2017;Lim et al, 2012;Reisdorf & DeCook, 2022;Stevens et al, 2017). Thus, intervention should be applied to prevent the use of the internet and social media as a way to return to risky and criminal behaviours (Bulger & Burton, 2020;Lim et al, 2013).…”