Digital divides of the internet and mobile phone: Structural determinants of the social context of communication technologies

Machines That Become Us: The Social Context of Personal Communication Technology

Volumn , Issue , 2017, Pages 91-104

  Rice, Ronald E ^a   Katz, James E ^b  

^a State University of New Jersey   (United States)

^b RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 70449712334     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (19)

1. An earlier version of this paper appeared in B. Wellman and C. Haythornthwaite (eds.) 2002. The Internet in Everyday Life. London: Blackwells
2. AOL 2000. American Online/Roper Starch Cyberstudy 2000. Roper #CNT375
3. Cultural Access Group 2001. Ethnicity in the Electronic Age: Looking at the Internet through Multicultural Lens. Los Angeles: Access Worldwide Communications, Inc
4. Hadden, S. and Lodis Rhodes (eds.). 1995, November. Evolution of Universal Service Policy. Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs, University of Texas, Austin
5. Haddon, L. 2001. Social Exclusion and Information and Communication Technologies. New Media & Society, 2(4), 387-406
6. Jupiter Communications. 2000. Assessing the Digital Divide. New York: Jupiter Communications press release, June 15. http://www.jup.com/company/pressrelease.jsp?doc=pr000615
7. Katz, J. E., Rice, Ronald E. andAspden, Philip. 2001. The Internet, 1995-2000: Access, Civic Involvement, and Social Interaction. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 404-419
8. Katz, James E. and Philip Aspden. 1998. Internet Dropouts: The Invisible Group. Telecommunications Policy, 22, (4/5, June), 327-339
9. Katz, James E. 1988. Telecommunications Privacy Policy in the U.S.A.: Socio-Political Responses to Technological Advances.' Telecommunications Policy, 12 (4): 353-68
10. Mante, Enid and Frank Thomas. 2002 Internet Have and Have Nots in Europe. Unpublished paper. EURESCOM/COST
11. McConnaughey, J. 2001. Taking the Measure of the Digital Divide: Net Effects of Research and Policy (summarizing results of the U.S. Department of Commerce, 2000). Presented to Web Workshop at University of Maryland Dept, of Sociology, June
12. Media Metrix. 1997. Online press release, http://www.mediametric.com/pcmpr33.htm
13. Net Users Mirror Nation's Gender Breakdown. 2001. USA Today, June 15. http:// www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/nb/nb5.htm
14. Rice, Ronald E., McCreadie, M. and Chang, S-J. 2001. Accessing and Browsing Information and Communication: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press
15. Rice, Ronald E. and Katz, James E. 2002. Comparing Internet and Mobile Phone Usage. Unpublished report from the Syntopia project, Department of Communication, Rutgers University (mimeo). Available from the authors
16. Tufekcioglu, Zeynep. 2001. Rethinking the Theory Behind the Digital Divide Initiatives: It's Not All Good All the Time in the Age of Deskilled, Low-Paying 'Hi-Tech' Jobs. Austin: University of Texas Department of Communication. Paper presented to the International Communication Association Conference, Washington, DC, May
17. U. S. Department of Commerce. 2000. Falling through the Net: Toward Digital Inclusion. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office
18. Walsh, E., Gazala, M. and Ham, C. 2001. The Truth about the Digital Divide. In B. Compaine (ed.), The Digital Divide: Facing a Crisis or Creating a Myth? (pp. 279-284.) Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press
19. Yahoo!News. February 19, 2001. Hispanics, Blacks and Women Surfing the Internet in Greater Numbers, http://dailynews.hayoo.eom/h/ll/20010219/co/ hispanics_blacks_and_women_surfing_the_internet_ingreater_numbers