Mobile Phones Will Not Eliminate Digital and Social Divides: How Variation in Internet Activities Mediates the Relationship Between Type of Internet Access and Local Social Capital in Detroit

Abstract

This study examines the relationship between mode of Internet access, variety of online activities, and the potential for the Internet to contribute to local social capital in distressed, urban communities. Based on a sample of 525 telephone surveys in Detroit, findings show that breadth of access predicts participation in a larger variety of online activities, which is associated with higher levels of local social capital. Neither public Internet access, home broadband, nor Internet access through a mobile phone data plan alone affords participation in a full range of social capital-enhancing activities. The findings highlight the potential problems of initiatives that assume equivalent social outcomes through nonequivalent modes of access, such as providing Internet access through mobile phones in place of home broadband. Efforts to enhance a city’s social infrastructure by providing Internet access are best served when individuals have multiple points of access available.

Constructing Household Routines with the Internet

“…Online service provisioning in key basic needs activity areas, such as health, education, public transit, government, and retail services, compounds the necessity of household internet services for TCHC residents. Though community intermediaries, such as public libraries and local coffee shops, play an important role in filling connectivity gaps for communities faced with precarious access to the internet, this support is both temporary, excludable, and primarily utilized for short-term access needs and discrete internet tasks (Reisdorf et al, 2020;Rhinesmith et al, 2019).…”

“…Contrastingly, low-income households with broadband access demonstrate a breadth of instrumental online activities including education and job seeking, and place a high value on remaining connected despite financial constraints. Similarly, Reisdorf et al (2020) dismantle criticisms of low-income community members engaging in a limited breadth of online activities by demonstrating that the nature of activities performed online are more closely associated with the connection modality itself (mobile versus fixed, public versus at-home). Affordability barriers can press individuals into having to choose between one modality over another; subsequently limiting the breadth of online activities they can pursue.…”

“…The research presented below is motivated by a need to deepen our understanding of the role of broadband in supporting a range of basic activities of daily living. Building on recent scholarship highlighting how limited connectivity options in low-income urban communities has informed a dependency on mobile and public space access (Reisdorf et al, 2020;Rhinesmith et al, 2019), this study directs its attention to the internet supported domestic routines of social housing residents. This level of analysis illustrates how at-home broadband services are instrumental in helping residents maintain their households in the face of limited financial and labour resources, as well as the risks associated with dependency on a precarious household technology.…”

Digital Inclusion as a Core Component of Social Inclusion

“…Gradations in what internet users can do with their access vary with regards to their socio-demographic background and offline resources (Helsper, 2012;Livingstone & Helsper, 2007), what kinds of devices they can afford and maintain (Gonzales, 2016), where they can access the internet, e.g., whether they are depending on mobile data plans or access through an internet service provider (Reisdorf et al, 2020), and other factors, such as digital skills (van Deursen & van Dijk, 2011) or attitudes toward technologies in general (Dutton & Reisdorf, 2019). Accordingly, digital inclusion activities cannot follow a one-size-fits-all approach-especially when we move the focus beyond the US or European context.…”

“…This research has shown that first-level divides (material access), second-level divides (skills and uses), and third-level divides (outcomes of differentiated access and use) persist, even in well-connected countries where the majority of the population is online (e.g., van Deursen, Helsper, Eynon, & van Dijk, 2017). Other studies have shown that mobile Internet access can help many people access the Internet in countries that lack wireline infrastructure-so-called mobile leapfroggingalbeit allowing a narrower range of activities and skills in comparison to access from a variety of devices (e.g., Reisdorf, Fernandez, Hampton, Shin, & Dutton, 2020;Tsetsi & Rains, 2017). Whereas we know quite a lot about what is lacking and for whom-which has become especially apparent during the current COVID-19 pandemicthere is less focus on what works to alleviate these inequalities and divides in a variety of cultural contexts.…”