Another concern I have about the
role of technology in our modern communications is quite distinct. As many have noted, there is a growing
technological divide based on socioeconomic status in this country.
The affluent have all kinds of
gadgets. They are deeply enmeshed in
electronic communication. But the less
affluent are not. If technological
communication is the new norm in how we interact in our professional and civic
lives, then the poor are at a huge disadvantage in terms of professional
attainment and participation in civic discourse.
I had heard about this problem for
well over a decade, but it started to become less abstract to me over the years
as I have worked with at-risk teens in various ministries and nonprofits. In various contexts, I have seen a pattern. One reason these teens were labeled as
“at-risk” to end up in these programs was that they had stolen cell phones or
smart phones, or they had appropriated such devices that the owners had lost. They were considered to have engaged in
various forms of theft, a criminal activity.
Let me acknowledge that in the base
case I don’t tend to have a lot of sympathy for theft of non-essential
items. In Les Miserables, Jean
Valjean stole bread to feed hungry children.
Inspector Javert is relentlessly unforgiving, but most readers (or
members of the audience) believe Javert’s heartless approach is not deserved or
appropriate. I too appreciate the
desperation of a man trying to feed starving children.
But when we are taking about
non-essentials like electronics, I just don’t understand. I have been a victim of property crimes at
different points in my life. It is not
fun. It is not fair. When you don’t have a whole lot, it is particularly
tough when what you do have is stolen.
It is easier for me to sympathize with the victim rather than the
perpetrator of property crimes.
Perhaps I’m hard-hearted, but I have
not been inclined to be sympathetic when the teens I’ve met have stolen or
misappropriated the cell phones or smart phones of others. But I’ve worked with so many teens who have
engaged in such behavior that I’ve at least become aware that it is not an
uncommon phenomenon. And I’ve tried to
understand the mindset and the emotional difficulties of a teen who would
engage in such activities. I have
listened to their perspective. It is not
easy for me to understand, but I try.
It has to be acknowledged that the
teens with whom I’ve worked have been from economically deprived families. These are not kids from affluent families
taking someone else’s cell phone or smart phone though they have access to one
through legitimate means. Instead, these
are kids who live in cramped, ugly apartments.
Their parents have dead-end jobs or are unemployed. There is not always food in the house. Health care is available only if the state
budget guidelines are inclusive enough.
In these households, luxuries like electronics are non-existent. On some level, I can conceptualize that it is
tough to not have the ability to text or e-mail or get information from the web
when it feels like everyone else in our society has that ability.
Recently, I caught the tail end of a
program Bill Moyers did on this issue of the high price of access to mobile
phone and internet. Mr. Moyers interviewed
Susan Crawford who had been a special assistant to President Obama for science,
technology and innovation. She has
written a book: Captive Audience: The
Telecom Industry and Monopoly Power in the New Gilded Age. The interview is accessible at the link below
In
the next few posts, I will discuss some thoughts about Ms. Crawford’s ideas.
Matthew 7:11
As bad as you are, you know how to give good things to your
children. How much more, then, will your Father in heaven give good things to
those who ask him!
No comments:
Post a Comment