Digital inequality as a problem in the development of the information society. Numerical inequalities and their properties. The concept of “Information inequality” in a narrow sense. General

Sociological and sociocultural aspects

In Russia, the problem of “digital inequality” has been discussed for a relatively long time and is studied by a number of specialists in both technical, sociological, economic and other fields. A number of scientific discussions and seminars are being held at which certain aspects of the digital inequality are discussed and the main ways to solve this serious social problem are put forward. This issue is also raised on many Internet forums by people who are not indifferent to the implementation of Electronic Government.

The problem of information inequality is extremely complex due to many features and causes and poses a great threat to the further positive development of Russian society. Therefore, the main task of public policy should be to unite the interests and capabilities of all interested parties - representatives of the executive and legislative branches, scientists, public figures - in order to create a developed civilized information society, a society of people with equal opportunities.

The problem of digital inequality has become quite widespread in Russian journalism and has become the subject of discussion at the highest political levels. The discussion was accompanied by actions aimed at both stimulating competition among telecommunications providers and adopting special programs to eliminate the digital divide. For example, in 2002, the Federal Target Program “Electronic Russia” began to be implemented. The President spoke out on this matter several times at various meetings and even in his annual address to the Federal Assembly. In particular, at the very beginning of his presidential term, at a meeting of the Presidium of the State Council, he stated that “the difference in information preparation, information capabilities that exist between people living in our country creates the so-called information gap, or digital divide, digital inequality".

It is also worth noting that the cost of an unlimited Internet connection in Vladivostok, for example, costs 1,300 rubles. per month with a very low Internet connection speed, and in Moscow they pay only 167 rubles per month for high-speed Internet. (In Ulyanovsk - about 400 rubles). This colossal gap is explained by the fact that regional providers have to pay Rostelecom for traffic to a large regional hub where the main channel runs. Another reason is the relatively low competition among providers in the regions. Fortunately, recently this situation has slowly begun to improve with the arrival of large interregional and national providers in the regions and the emergence of Wi-Fi access points in the regions.

However, “information inequality” is not limited to the lack of access to computers and the Internet: it is not enough to provide access - it is necessary that people can take advantage of this access. Awareness and qualifications in the field of modern information technologies is a social skill that is rapidly becoming a necessity for a modern person. It should be taken into account that behind the inequality in the level of computer/information literacy of the population are hidden at least two more closely related aspects of information inequality. Firstly, this is the problem of lack of motivation, when people do not want to use information and computer technologies, although they have such an opportunity. Secondly, information inequality is also generated by a lack of content: lack of motivation is often explained precisely by the fact that people cannot find what they need on the Internet or get the services they need.

Lack of skills or ability to work with a computer and the Internet, as well as the lack of such a need, are the main reasons why many people do not want to use electronic government services. Such motives are more common among older people. According to the Public Opinion Foundation (FOM), 10% of such people living in cities with a population of 250 thousand to 1 million people do not own a computer or the Internet, it is difficult for them, another 10% do not want to own them because they don’t need it, 6% do not have a computer or Internet access, 5% do not trust the Internet.

Until recently, no special attention was paid to the problem of “digital inequality” in Russia; there are enough problems without it. However, today there is finally an understanding that information technologies directly affect the level of socio-economic development of the region.

The fact remains: a huge layer of social life has partially, and in some areas completely, moved to a digital format. Lack of access to digital services leaves huge numbers of people without communication, education, health care and essential information services. At the same time, as in the case of economic goods, the “digital inequality” only worsens over time: the rich become richer and the poor become poorer.

In the 21st century, humanity has officially entered the era of a post-industrial information society. This means that one of the main values that determines the well-being of both individuals and states as a whole is access to information. Thanks to this, we can talk about “digital inequality” in the same vein as material disadvantage (in other words, poverty). The difference between a person who actively uses the Internet and modern means of communication and a person who does not have access to all this is almost as noticeable as the difference between a rich man and a pauper.

An increasingly significant part of the life of the most advanced part of the population is moving into the virtual space: it is easier for such people to communicate with other network users, no matter how far they are, it is easier to keep abreast of everything that is happening, it is easier to provide for themselves and adapt to a changing environment. The Internet is becoming an integral part of the life of the modern information society. The more difficult it becomes for people who, for various reasons, are unable to access the network. It is enough to note the fact that when applying for a job, preference is given to those applicants who know how to use a computer and the Internet.

The problem of informatization of the planet's population is becoming truly global. States are forced to prioritize raising the level of education and professional qualifications of their citizens, because today the competitiveness of a nation is determined to a decisive extent by the availability of highly qualified human resources. Those countries that cannot increase the level of development of information technology and make the most effective use of scientific achievements in this area will inevitably lag behind their neighbors. As a result, the economic and social inequality of nations in the world will increase even more. If the state fails to bridge the digital divide in time, new technologies, which contain enormous opportunities, will lead to even greater differentiation of society.

"Inequality" in Russian

In Russia, the problem of inequality traditionally manifests itself in a sharp contrast between the center and the periphery. The unprecedented gap between the richest and the poorest in economic terms is no less pronounced in the case of the digital divide. “Information luxury” of megacities, where all modern means of telecommunications are available, and the Russian hinterland, sometimes completely cut off from any means of communication.

Moreover, inequality is aggravated not only by the lack of access to technical means, but also by the inability to use them due to age and educational reasons. After all, information inequality is not only inequality in access to the technology itself, because the fact of its presence does not always mean that you know how or are ready to use it for its intended purpose.

According to leading employees of the Russian Academy of Sciences, other signs of “digital inequality” can also be classified - property, age, educational, territorial, cultural and even gender characteristics. The main one in Russia is the territorial factor: for the inhabitants of the rural hinterland, their place of residence, willy-nilly, largely determines rather low opportunities in the field of informatization.

What measures need to be taken in order to nevertheless bridge the gap that has formed, when only a part of the population has access to modern technologies, knows how to use them and receive certain benefits from it?

As a possible option that can influence the solution of the problem, it is proposed to increase public awareness of new opportunities, as well as improve the system of training and retraining in information and communication technologies (ICT). It is necessary to create conditions for the development of a knowledge society, so that in Russia the number of people who have access to modern ICTs, who know how to use them and receive benefits from them, constantly grows.

In the list of priorities aimed at reducing inequality, experts strongly recommend including, firstly, the formation of public opinion (in particular, this could be conducting opinion polls and open discussions or analyzing public reports). Secondly, the cultural and information sphere requires expansion (it is understood that with an increase in the number of cultural and information centers, public access to ICT will automatically increase). Thirdly, we need monitoring of residents’ readiness to live and work in the information community. Fourthly, the development and implementation of an electronic social assistance system for representatives of various categories of citizens (whether disabled, pensioners, unemployed, migrants or pregnant women) is welcomed.

In a word, as a way out of the situation, it is proposed to create conditions in modern society that would maximally facilitate the dissemination of relevant knowledge among people, which, in turn, would sufficiently increase the level of their information culture. By the way, it is precisely this cultural level that directly determines how quickly the line of digital inequality will be erased, when the ballast for the development of the information society becomes the unpreparedness of citizens themselves to use ICT or their reluctance to learn to use these technologies in principle.

Specific steps

An important step towards overcoming the inequality that Russians experience in terms of access to communication infrastructure was certain guarantees from the state, thanks to which rural schools now have access to the World Wide Web, and any lost village has its own payphone.

The working group under the Presidential Commission on Modernization also approved the project of a domestic satellite Internet access system developed by the Moscow Scientific Research Institute "Radio" (NIIR). The goal of this project, designed to provide high-speed access to information networks using satellite communication systems, was also to eliminate the digital divide between Russians, who should have equal opportunities to use information and government services in electronic form.

Let us recall that the development of this project was launched in 2009, the start of providing services within the framework of its implementation in practice is scheduled for 2013, which even includes the launch of four spacecraft into geostationary orbit. But be that as it may, the main aspect of creating such a system is the social orientation of the project. First of all, this is the provision of social tariffs and provision of preferential terms for the sale of terminals, which will be sold in installments for a period of at least two years.

According to (NIIR), thanks to the project, over 5,000 new jobs will appear in Russia. It is also planned to open technical support and user service centers throughout the country. According to the estimates of the project developers, as a result of its implementation, conditions will be created in the regions for approximately 150 thousand small businesses to operate. In other words, in addition to eliminating the digital divide, the project will really help business development in remote areas of the country.

Call me

While space satellites have not yet been launched into orbit, let us turn to another example that allows us to reduce the digital divide. We are talking about mobile communications, the spread of which, coupled with the reduction in the cost of equipment and accessories, as well as the constant reduction in the cost of services, has made it quite accessible to almost the vast majority of the world’s inhabitants. Suffice it to say that in a number of countries of the so-called “third world” this type of communication is the only one available to the population.

The uniqueness of cellular communications also lies in the fact that even representatives of older generations successfully master it. Let them not access the Internet through a mobile phone, do not use mobile phones as a camera and avoid sending SMS, but still master basic functions.

If we take into account the less conservative sections of the population, who widely and actively use the entire range of opportunities offered to them by cellular operators, then it should be recognized that access to the Internet through cellular networks is rightfully considered one of the main ways to minimize the digital divide.

The almost universal distribution of third generation (3G) cellular networks, as well as the upcoming emergence of the next, fourth generation networks in the near future, is quite capable of solving the problem of Internet access throughout almost the entire territory of Russia. And for many people, the mobile Internet has already become as familiar and accessible as mobile communications.

What about the regions?

How is the barrier of digital inequality overcome in the constituent entities of the Russian Federation? The solution to the problem in towns and cities is greatly facilitated by high competition in the telecommunications markets of the regions. Firstly, it benefits end consumers. Secondly, it has a positive effect on operators who are trying to attract new technologies, install modern equipment, maximize the range of services provided, and at the same time take into account the developments of competitors and transfer the positive experience of their “colleagues” to their basket.

However, along with positive factors, there are also many obstacles. Perhaps the most significant of them is the poorly developed communication infrastructure, without the methodical development of which it is simply impossible to build a unified infocommunication space in the province. Meanwhile, the implementation of many large-scale projects (including those at the national level) depends on it.

Despite this, operators often prefer to invest financial resources exclusively in extremely profitable projects. The logic here is simple: maximum financial return plus minimum payback period. It comes to the point that in large cities there are providers that do not even serve the entire city limits, but only the most densely populated areas. What can we say about peripheral cities, regional centers and rural areas with villages, villages and towns, where it’s hard to find operators who would willingly invest in the long term. However, they can also be understood: there is no developed communication infrastructure, the construction of new networks requires high costs, and the level of demand leaves much to be desired.

100%

Experts have long come to the conclusion: to overcome the digital divide, it is necessary to provide 100% educational institutions, healthcare institutions, state authorities and local governments with modern digital communication services. And many Russian regions, at the instigation of their own government, have already begun such work.

“At the infrastructure level, an interdepartmental data transmission network has been created, which is now expanding to municipalities. The issue of providing access to the data network and the Internet for remote settlements is being resolved, and this is a big problem for the republic, where the distance between settlements can exceed 200 kilometers,” says Alexander Selyutin, assistant to the head and chief designer of the electronic government of the Komi Republic.

“Today in the Republic of Tatarstan an optical communication channel with a capacity of at least 1 Gbit/s has been installed to each regional center, and for large cities it is 10 Gbit/s. In addition, we have managed to connect more than 1,000 government agencies via fiber optic communication channels,” continues Nikolay Nikiforov, Deputy Prime Minister - Minister of Information and Communications of the Republic of Tatarstan.

The priority direction of the state's social policy should be the creation of conditions for each person in which he could fully acquire the skills and knowledge necessary for living and working in the information society.

There is no doubt that increasing computer literacy is extremely important for the entire population. But first of all, it should be provided to students of secondary schools, mid-level educational institutions (vocational lyceums, colleges, schools) and students of universities: institutes, universities, academies. Therefore, it is possible and necessary to solve these global problems only by enlisting support from the state. And already provided that such support is received, the main goal of the state information policy should be the development of a legal information society, entirely focused on the interests of people who would have not only open access to information and knowledge, but also the opportunity to create and other.

As a result, already at the next stage, information potential can be used for the socio-economic and cultural development of the country, improving the quality of life of Russians, strengthening the information space itself, further minimizing digital inequality on a regional scale, and bridging the “digital gap” between different groups and segments of the population.

Preserving and enhancing the diversity of the information sector, whether official or business, reference or educational, scientific, sports, cultural or entertainment, is a cornerstone of bridging the digital divide. The advantages of this approach are obvious: information is available to a range of users throughout the planet, in different languages and in different formats, and its diversity only contributes to constructive dialogue between individuals, sectors of society and even entire nations.

Maxim Nikitin

Diplomacy is a sphere of centuries-old traditions

Mikhail Afanasyev, director of the information support department of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, answered CNews’ questions.

CNews: What main tasks were solved during the informatization of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs?

Informatization of the Russian Foreign Ministry is a purposeful multi-vector process designed to ensure the most effective execution by the ministry of its state functions in implementing the country's foreign policy based on modern methods and decision-making mechanisms, as well as the implementation of a significant number of applied tasks, including administrative, personnel, economic, etc. .d.

In terms of practical results, we can talk about the gradual formation of a single information space, covering the central office of the Russian Foreign Ministry, its territorial bodies and Russian foreign institutions (embassies, representative offices, consulates). Several specialized information systems were put into operation; Numerous databases necessary for the work of diplomats and other specialists have been created. The departments of the ministry are equipped with automated workstations for all employees without exception.

An independent area of informatization should include the creation of modern consular systems, which made it possible to automate almost all functions assigned to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in this area, provided to Russian and foreign citizens and organizations.

At all stages of the informatization process, the leadership of the Russian Foreign Ministry paid and continues to pay great attention to information security issues. There is no need to explain how sensitive political, economic, military-strategic, etc. information is. nature, processed by the foreign policy department. The WikiLeaks scandal confirms the fact that their leak can lead to the most negative consequences for the international situation and bilateral relations of states. Information protection is one of the ministry’s priorities, including in relation to its own information systems.

Terminology

In the Russian language, there is no single equivalent to the term digital divide, which is well-established in English. The phrases “digital barrier”, “digital inequality”, “digital divide”, “digital divide”, “digital divide” are used.

The term originated as a sign of a split in the family, when the husband spent too much time on the computer to the detriment of everything else, and the wife could not come to terms with it.

The essence of the phenomenon

Currently, the “digital divide” is a term of a socio-political nature. The opportunities of a disadvantaged group are affected by the lack or limited access to television, the Internet, telephone communications (mobile and landline), and radio. All this limits the ability of this group to find work, establish social connections, and cultural exchange and can negatively affect economic efficiency, the development and preservation of culture, and the level of education. According to generally accepted views on the information society, its specificity is such that the free exchange of information helps to overcome poverty and inequality, but for those who are disconnected from such exchange, the prospects deteriorate catastrophically (Castells, Himanen: “The global trend is that the information economy is connecting to its network those who are valuable to it (thereby giving them additional value), but disconnecting those who are not of value to it (thereby further reducing their chances of gaining any - value)").

The term applies both to differences between countries (example: in Iceland, more than 86% of the population has access to the Internet, and in Liberia - 0.03%) and to differences in the capabilities of different social strata within the same society.

Connection with chauvinism

Some observers see in this phenomenon a deliberate “policy of exclusion” that is being pursued by certain countries and societies - instead of the previous policy of repression. At the UN Summit on the Information Society (WSIS) in December, at the initiative of the majority of third world countries, a Declaration was adopted calling on Western countries to do everything to overcome the “digital divide” in its current form by the year, but leading European countries and Japan even did not delegate their official representatives to the summit.

Sources

Manuel Castells, Pekka Himanen: Information society and the welfare state. Finnish model. - M., 2002

Links

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

See what “Digital Divide” is in other dictionaries:

digital divide- Inequality between different segments of the population arising from the inability of low-income citizens to take advantage of information technologies, the Internet, distance learning, etc. Topics... ... Technical Translator's Guide

Digital barrier, digital inequality, information inequality (eng. Digital divide) limitation of the capabilities of a social group due to its lack of access to modern means of communication. Contents 1 Terminology 2 Essence ... ... Wikipedia

Digital barrier, digital divide (eng. Digital divide) limitation of opportunities for a social group due to its lack of access to modern means of communication. Contents 1 Terminology 2 The essence of the phenomenon 3 Connection with chauvinism ... Wikipedia

"VTK" request is redirected here. Another transcript Educational labor colony. OJSC "VolgaTelecom" Type Open joint-stock company Year of foundation... Wikipedia

Type Netbook Processor ... Wikipedia

Wikiversity Wikiversity http://wikiversity.org/ Commercial: No Site type: Online encyclopedia ... Wikipedia

Books

Regional Economics: Theory and Practice No. 22 (349) 2014, Absent. The magazine covers problems of economics and development of administrative-territorial entities, industries and industries; economic strategy for sustainable development of the Russian Federation and its regions... eBook

The problems of the information society, information as a productive force came to the center of attention of philosophers, political scientists, sociologists, and specialists in other humanities and technical sciences after the Second World War, when the economies of Western Europe and North America made a qualitative leap in their development. The post-industrial era has become a time of formation of new ideas about the communicative, informational nature of society. Norbert Wiener was the first to specifically develop these problems, followed by many other theorists. Alvin Toffler’s trilogy “Future Shock”, “The Third Wave” and “Metamorphoses of Power” played a great influence on the formation of approaches to the information society. Among the important works on the topic, it is necessary to highlight the books of the Spanish sociologist Manuel Castells, who in one of them, “The Information Age,” gave a periodization of the last stage of human development from the point of view of the introduction and dissemination of information technologies, expanding the sphere of non-productive employment of the population in economically developed countries. No less interesting is his study “The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business and Society.” Those whose contribution to the progress of information technology is undeniable also showed significant interest in this topic.

Domestic theorists paid attention to this issue back in the 80s, but then their research was largely ideologized. However, then scientific objectivity and thoroughness of elaboration of the topic became inherent in the works of Russian authors.

Much attention in our country was also paid to the generalization and analysis of foreign experience in the development of information technologies. The works of Professor E.L. stand out here. Vartanova, who, using the example of the Nordic countries, showed the main trends in the development of information processes and the problems of societies with developed economies in the context of their globalization.

Defining the digital divide

Digital inequality is defined as the stratification of society and states in their ability to receive and use information transmitted through new information and communication technologies. The author considers this phenomenon in the context of general

social processes, including economic and political, and this is a new approach for domestic science. The digital divide is a historical category because it reflects the previous development of countries and societies. At the same time, it is a reflection of the contradictions of the globalization process.

The author understands digital inequality as a consequence of the economic and technological lag of certain population groups, countries and even entire regions from progress in the field of education and infocommunications, which is not regulated at the state level, at the level of the international community of development of information processes. It can be characterized by the following provisions:

digital inequality is a social phenomenon caused by contradictions in the development of traditional spheres of human activity, government structure, economic and political relations; the development of the level of education and culture, the life of the population, the state of civil society institutions, the degree of development of the media. The digital divide depends on the state of human rights and freedoms; it is associated with the pace and methods of introducing new technologies into an individual’s everyday life;

digital inequality is a multi-component whole, it manifests itself in difficult access to information and communication technologies; in the unpreparedness of users to work with them; the limited national information and functional resources; the first two components make it possible to present digital inequality as an intra-economic phenomenon, the third - as a phenomenon that exists between countries;

this phenomenon is inherent in a variety of societies, including economically developed ones, since there the gap between those who have access to the Internet and those who do not, significantly increases the social distance between citizens;

digital inequality changes the balance of power in the international arena, as it contributes to the formation of a community of states of a new information culture, the establishment by these states of a new world information order;

digital inequality hinders not only those who find themselves in the “second echelon”, but also the countries of the new information order themselves in achieving peace and stability, strengthening their own security: information technologies make states dependent on equipment and technology, vulnerable to external influences and terrorist attacks;

the digital divide simultaneously serves as a field of interaction for cooperation between states with different levels of information and communication equipment;

Digital inequality, however, is not a consequence of linear social processes. Countries with strong economies and developed institutions of politics and law have limited preferences in the information sphere, while small and even backward states that began to develop new technologies were able to dramatically jump ahead, give impetus to the development of their economies, and improve the well-being of citizens;

digital inequality can be overcome by changing the mentality of citizens and social institutions, primarily business; new education helps more and more people access the possibilities of the Internet; the activity of entrepreneurs makes it possible to achieve a breakthrough in the development of global information technology markets: the successful development of firms, their partners and related suppliers begins to determine the behavior and preferences of citizens who, after a short time without the Internet, cannot imagine either public administration, or the education system, or their economy countries;

the digital divide is also being overcome thanks to targeted government policies; Today, so-called e-governments are being created everywhere, which refers to new ways of interaction between citizens and government bodies using information technology.

Unfortunately, there are very few serious studies devoted specifically to the problems of digital inequality, and their focus is mainly on the situation in the poorest countries.

The main reasons for the emergence of social distances in the information sphere

Despite the fact that many countries in pursuing domestic policies after the Second World War were confident in the vital need to overcome social distances between people in order to create a stable, conflict-free society, the contradictions not only did not disappear, but, on the contrary, began to further separate one person from another.

The stratification of society is affected by many factors: the history of the country and its relationships with surrounding states, the state of the economy and the characteristics of the political system, natural and climatic conditions and the mentality of the population. Overcoming the differences between city and countryside, people of mental and physical labor has been the object of study by philosophers, political scientists, economists, and scientists of other specialties.

Over the centuries, there has been a connection between progress in the field of science and technology, which determines the current state of the information sphere, and social relations.

“The history of recent centuries clearly shows that each scientific and technological revolution increases the stratification of society in the short term, but its consequences reduce the stratification of society in the longer term,” one cannot but agree with this conclusion.

This was the history, for example, of the media. If initially printed works and periodicals were accessible to a few, then with the spread of literacy, the cheaper production of books, newspapers and magazines, and the increase in the general standard of living of people, they became not just mass publications, but an integral element of the economy, politics, culture, and traditions of many peoples. Over time, when this achievement of human thought became widespread, it made it possible to level out differences between people and ensure large-scale advancement of entire nations.

This determined the advent of the era of information technology development, where other social differences manifested themselves. The material situation of people, their cultural and spiritual world are now “measured” on a new “scale”: the possibilities and ways of using a wide variety of information, access to technologies that ensure such use.

However, the phenomenon of social distances in the information sphere has only recently become the subject of consideration by scientists. Researchers such as Norbert Wiener, Herbert Marshall McLuhan, Wilbur Schramm, Herbert Schiller and others paid their attention to macro- and microprocesses in a human community undergoing transformations: changes in the structure of society, its cultural and industrial dynamics, or, conversely, psychological transformations of the individual in connection with intensification of information exchanges.

Russian scientists, assessing the approaches of their foreign colleagues to these problems, pointed to the natural “technocratic” and “psychometric” nature in such cases, to the fact that the efforts of theorists were aimed at explaining the realities of the information society, its general characteristics, and at identifying the main factors influencing people .

However, as a result of this consideration of problems, the information society was presented as different from traditional society. These “parallel” worlds - society and information society - in the concepts of scientists were, as it were, each on their own; the information society stood apart from social interactions.

This view of things changed with the new large-scale development and introduction of computers into the work practices of many firms and individuals in the 90s of the twentieth century, which made it necessary to evaluate the emergence and development of the information society as an option for social modernization. Such consideration of problems was, of course, primarily due to the fact that information technologies penetrated the economy, became its driving force, and changed the balance of traditional industries. Information turns into a product that has its own market and determines the price of goods in other markets.

In the conditions of intensification of information exchanges, the internal state of individual countries was also affected by their starting capabilities in economics and politics at the time of the advent of the new information era, as well as by the state of the intellectual potential of society, science and education. Of great importance, as it turned out, is the nature of national traditions, including in such an area as the media, in particular, whether a particular people is verbal, for which the traditions of oral speech are dominant, or whether its culture is based on writing. The geographical features of the country and the compactness or dispersion of its population were also extremely important.

“New technical means of communication - computers, space satellites, television, combined with a powerful, expanding system of corporate business,” according to G. Schiller, “helped push the United States to the center of the world economy.”

However, this did not mean at all that only those countries that had a strong economy and developed political and legal institutions could count on automatically receiving preferences in the information sphere. It turned out that there are small or even backward states in this sense that used the historical opportunity that opened up to move forward. Such countries include, for example, Ireland, whose experience will be discussed below, or India, whose specialists in the field of computer technology have become coveted employees in leading research and production centers in Western Europe and North America.

The path of Finland is indicative. This country’s breakthrough in the development of global information technology markets is associated with the development of Nokia, its partners and allies. Thanks to the company's successful business, the whole country was able to make a sharp leap forward and become a leading supplier of mobile telecommunications. And this determined the behavior and preferences of Finnish citizens: without the Internet today it is impossible to imagine either public administration, or the education system, or the economy of this country. The Internet is part of Finnish life, thanks to it they follow the news, shop, study and work.

Information technologies are developing rapidly and covering the whole world throughout the 90s. International relations are being modernized; they are based on the exchange of information, and this goes “above barriers”: the uncontrolled virtual space is equally accessible to any user connected to the Internet, regardless of his location.

This, as political practice shows, causes not only positive responses from states, but also social fears. The Prime Minister of Guyana summed up his concerns as follows: “A nation whose mass media is controlled from outside is not a nation.”

All this indicates that the emergence and development of the information society reflects existing social contradictions and gives rise to new ones. Thus, in individual countries and in the system of states in the world as a whole, not only have the rich and the poor not disappeared, but, on the contrary, now their position is different in the virtual space. The emergence of information rich and information poor within individual states, the presence or, on the contrary, absence of certain countries in the global Network is explained, of course, primarily by economics and politics.

However, the information sphere is no longer a passive agent of these relations; it influences society, determines the development of the economy and politics, determines the rate of production growth, the accumulation of intellectual wealth, and the formation of a new way of life. This forces Internet users to be more active. Virtual space unites those segments of the Earth's population that have achieved a privileged position in the sphere of information.

And this means that within even the most powerful states there are outsiders who are inaccessible to the technological innovations of the century, which remain outside the “territory” of information. And for intercountry interactions, the urgent need is to create a modern communication infrastructure, without which no state will be able to stand on a par with economically developed ones. The distance between people and states is not only not decreasing, but increasing.

The stratification of society in terms of its ability to receive and use information transmitted through advanced technologies is collectively called digital inequality (digital divide).

“The difference between rich and poor is what primarily determines the depth of the digital divide both between countries and between social strata within these countries. This occurs due to the fact that access to information technology is limited by a high “monetary threshold” – both for the state and for the population.”

The emergence of information inequality, i.e. The division of countries according to the level of “information development” is due to the fact that the economy is traditionally focused on the effective demand of the population. Today in the world there are about 100 million people with an income of more than 20 thousand US dollars per year. They can take advantage of all the benefits of the informatization process, but the rest of the population may fall out of this process. This is also evidenced by the fact that today, out of 6 billion people on Earth, 4.5 billion people are in developing countries, 80% of whom do not use a telephone, and half of them have not even seen a telephone. Such imbalances, of course, create great problems for global economic development.

A key indicator of the quality of information support is the degree to which the population of a particular country uses the Internet. From this point of view, the leading country in the world is the United States, where the Internet is systematically visited by 66% of the adult population, i.e. about 137 million people. Experts believe that Europe will reach this level of use of the capabilities of virtual space only by 2006. In 2001, about 116 million people had access to the Internet in Europe. The largest Internet audience in the Old World is in Germany - more than 30 million users. The UK is in second place with 20 million.

There is a digital divide in Europe too. It is noted that if in countries in the North of the continent (Sweden, Denmark, Norway, the Netherlands) the penetration of the Internet in families is over 30%, then in the South (Greece, Portugal, Spain, Italy) this figure is much lower - about 4–10%.

But even within these countries, the situation of population groups varies significantly. The digital divide between citizens is huge even in the United States. In September 2001, the Census Bureau, part of the US Commerce, Economic and Statistics Administration, together with the national Telecommunications and Information Administration, conducted a large-scale study on the problems of Internet use in this country. In total, more than 57 thousand households and 137 thousand individuals were surveyed throughout the United States. The survey results were analyzed and published as a report in February 2002.

A rapid increase in the use of new information technologies has been identified across all demographic groups and geographic regions. The number of Internet users in the United States increased by two million every month. The researchers paid attention to the standard of living of the respondents, their ethnic origin, and place of residence. It turned out that in the United States an increasingly higher percentage of the population is being captured by informatization processes, and these processes are contradictory and nonlinear:

From December 1998 to September 2001, the number of people in the lowest income bracket (less than $15,000 per year) using the Internet in households increased by 25% annually, while Internet use in households among those in the highest high level of income ($75 thousand per year or more) – only by 11% per year;

From August 2000 to September 2001, Internet use among blacks and Hispanics increased annually by 33% and 30%, respectively. Whites, Asian Americans, and Pacific Islanders experienced a 20% annual increase in internet use during the same period;

from 1998 to 2001, the increase in the number of Internet users among people living in rural areas averaged 24% annually; the percentage of Internet users in rural areas (53%) almost reached the national average (54%) by 2001

Americans connect to the Internet to carry out an ever-expanding range of activities: in 2001, 45% used e-mail, almost a third used the Internet to search for information about goods and services, and 39% made purchases.

Children and adolescents are more involved in information interactions than any other age group: 90% of children aged 5 to 17 years (or 48 million people) used computers in 2001; 75% of children aged 14–17 and 65% of children aged 10–13 used the Internet. Households with children under 18 are more likely to have internet access (62%) than households without children (53%) and than non-family households (35%). Computers in schools significantly reduce the difference in the use of technology between children from high- and low-income families. In general, Americans are increasingly using computers and the Internet not only at home, but also in the workplace, schools, universities, etc.

Despite such impressive successes of the United States in the field of dissemination of information and communication technologies, in American society there are two large groups of citizens who do not use the services of the Internet: those who are not connected and those who have disconnected from the Internet.

These include families with low incomes (the Internet is not used by 75% of people living in families in which the annual income does not exceed 15 thousand US dollars, and 66.6% of people whose family income is from 15 thousand to 35 thousand US dollars per year); persons with a low level of education (60.2% of citizens over 25 years of age who have completed only secondary school, and 87.2% of adults with less than a secondary education level do not use the Internet); persons of Spanish descent (68.4% of the Hispanic population and 85.9% of families where Spanish is the only language of communication do not use the Internet) and African Americans (60.2%).

The high cost of using the Internet is indicated in sociological surveys by the majority of respondents from households not connected to it. These and other reasons for abandoning the Internet have led many American households to stop using it (3.6 million people, or 3.3% of all American households in September 2001). Households with incomes below $50,000 cited the Internet as “too expensive” as the main reason.

However, some households do not want to connect to the Internet for reasons of personal safety. Protection of privacy and confidentiality of transactions on the Internet do not seem high and reliable to this category of people.

Some families, especially those with children under 18 years of age, refuse to connect to the Internet at home due to the fact that a variety of information is posted on the Internet, including content inappropriate for minors.

In general, the digital divide that exists in the United States is characterized by the following:

college or university graduates have eight times more computers at home than those who only completed high school, and among the latter, the number of those with Internet access is 16 times less than among the former;

the number of high-income families living in urban regions with access to the Internet is twenty times greater than similarly equipped families in rural and low-income regions;

children in low-income white families are three times more likely to use the Internet compared to similar black families and four times more likely to use the Internet compared to similar families of Hispanic origin;

wealthy families on the US Pacific Coast have 13 times more home computers than poor black families and are 34 times more likely to use the Internet;

Children in white, two-parent families are twice as likely to use the Internet as children in white, single-parent families. Children in two-parent black families have nearly four times more access to the Internet than children in single-parent black families.

The presence of digital stratification leads to inequality among citizens not only in receiving the latest types of services provided via the Internet, but also in realizing the constitutional right to equal access to state information resources. Concern about the problem of the digital divide in the United States exists at all levels of government; it is considered by the American government and the private sector of the economy as key to the future of the country6.

But there are also significant socio-psychological incentives for connecting to the Internet. As a rule, adaptation of all new technologies begins slowly. At a certain stage of their distribution, new mechanisms are launched, and the number of users grows rapidly. As the market becomes saturated, this process slows down because most people who wanted the innovation already have it.

In general, technology adaptation does not occur uniformly across the country. The prevalence of fax machines, for example, is much higher in businesses than in households. Fax has never competed with the telephone or mail for home communications, while there is significant business value in the instant transmission of documents.

With the Internet, the situation is different: if a person’s family, friends and wider circle of friends are Internet users, then this becomes an incentive for him to connect to the Internet himself. And vice versa, if there are few people in a person’s family, friends or acquaintances who use the Internet, then his incentive to connect is low.

Electronic commerce, which has been rapidly developing in recent years, which refers to the use of a whole range of communication means (telephone, fax, credit cards, ATMs, teleshopping, electronic database exchanges, the Internet, etc.) to carry out commercial transactions, also forces more and more new segments of the population connect to the network. In the United States alone, Internet-related activity was worth $507 billion in 1999 and employed 2.7 million Americans.

Currently, 30% of the growth in the US gross domestic product is due to information technology. In terms of sales, this industry has already surpassed both the aviation and automobile industries and has actually become the locomotive of the American economy.

The conclusion of experts is largely paradoxical: in the next three to four years, the problem of digital inequality in the United States and Western Europe will be solved, but 25% of the population will still be left behind.

The successes of such a small country as Ireland are obvious in this regard. Its government, as will be discussed later, has in recent years pursued an extremely pragmatic policy regarding foreign investment, especially in the field of information technology. By the time the development of these technologies began, the level of economic development of the country was relatively high; however, dozens of other countries were at the same level of development. But only here it was possible to significantly increase the consumption of information technology.

The reason is that in the 80s and especially in the 90s, the country consistently implemented a set of measures to transform Ireland into a key player in the European information technology market, primarily in the field of software production and trade. By 1997, there were 1,100 foreign companies operating in Ireland, one in ten of which were in the information technology sector. Seven of the world's top ten software manufacturers have subsidiaries or affiliates in Ireland, including Microsoft, Novel, InfoMikes, Corel and others.

The activities of foreign software companies are very broad and consist of basic development, “tailoring” products to user requirements, testing, etc. Software developed in Ireland is used in cellular communications, electronics, engineering, enterprise resource planning, database management, banking and insurance, and Internet security.

And yet, the country's main specialization in the field of high technology is data processing and software production. In total, this information technology sector consisted of 760 companies employing 21,630 people in 1998. The total turnover of these companies amounted to 7.4 billion US dollars, and the volume of exports was 6.6 billion US dollars. Only 120 of these companies were foreign, but they provided 83.5% of the turnover and 87.6% of the exports of this sector . According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, in 1998, Ireland ranked first in the world in terms of software exports - $3.29 billion, surpassing even the United States ($2.956 billion). Ireland accounts for 55.5% of EU software exports.

Consulting and system integration services companies use Ireland as a base to support international clients, providing technical support to customers around the world through toll-free call centers located in Ireland. Some software companies that started out as small firms are now leaders in their markets, introducing new products and offering solutions using Internet technologies. A highly efficient distribution system allows you to deliver goods to any point in Europe by road within 24–48 hours. An increasing number of companies are realizing the added benefit of locating pan-European logistics departments in Ireland.

Ireland's success in the development of modern information technology industries was determined, on the one hand, by favorable conditions, and on the other, by the government's effective industrial policy.

The advantages include:

Ireland's membership in the European Union and the absence of trade and other barriers to entry into European markets;

the presence of a relatively young and cheap workforce8 with a good level of education;

low inflation rates and relatively low production costs;

significant scale of subsidizing the country from European Union funds.

The example of Ireland, however, shows that in the field of information technology, no one country can dominate literally in all areas. There is an international division of labor in this area: processors are well made in America, electronic memory is made well in Southeast Asia.

This reduces global inequality to a certain extent. In any case, any country has the opportunity to offer some of its own products that are interesting to others.

This effect was named among specialists after the children's game of leap-and-frog. In practice, this means that even countries that are underdeveloped in information terms can make a “leap” over the shoulders of their predecessors, using the most advanced technology. In theory, such “leaps” are possible and provide optimism to developing countries that they are “not left behind forever.”

However, this does not eliminate the general imbalances in the use of information and communication technologies in the world. For example, of the 380 million users of the global information network on the planet (data as of September 2000), about 43% are residents of the USA and Canada, another 27% are in Europe, about 24% are in the countries of the Asia-Pacific region, about 4% - to Latin American countries. In fact, more than 90% of the world's Internet users are members of the richest fifth of the world's population. The inequality is also due to the fact that 80% of the world's software is written in English, while 75% of the world's population does not know English.

In general, the volume of the global information technology market is, according to experts, 120 billion US dollars. More than $30 billion of this is money that developed countries “give” to developing countries in order to reduce their corporate costs; Among the “recipients” there are approximately fifteen countries: India is in first place, China is in second place, and Malaysia and the Philippines are in third place.

Many developing countries are well aware of the importance of new information and communication technologies for development, but, according to the latest estimates of global research organizations, they account for no more than 15% of users of information and communication technologies (including the Internet). From 1995 to 1998, these countries put into operation more than 155 million dial-up and 4 million dedicated telephone lines, and 105 million people became mobile subscribers.

At the same time, this growth is accompanied by a widening gap between rich and poor countries in the diffusion of information and communications technologies. All of Africa, with its population of more than 700 million, had only 2% of the world's telephone networks in 1998.

In 1999, New York had more Internet subscribers than the entire African continent and South America combined. If we take into account that the pace of Internet penetration in the world has only increased in recent years, then against this background the share of African connections has been steadily declining. So, if in 1997 the countries of the continent accounted for 0.025% of basic computers in the system with Internet access, then by the beginning of 1998 this figure fell to 0.022%.

To characterize the inclusion of countries in the system of information and communication technologies, a number of authors propose to use the so-called Technological Progress Index. It brings together five indicators of the development of the country’s information and communication infrastructure: the number of personal computers (per thousand inhabitants), Internet hosts (per ten thousand inhabitants), fax machines (per thousand inhabitants), mobile phones (per thousand inhabitants) and televisions (per thousand inhabitants). thousand inhabitants).

The index is calculated for the economies of 110 countries. The range of its change is from 0 to 100, where the maximum value belongs to the USA, and the zero value belongs to Mozambique. Countries are ordered in descending order of the value of this index. The top ten countries are members of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD); Among the top twenty leading countries, only two are not included in the OECD (Hong Kong - 12th place and Singapore - 17th place). The last ten places are occupied by African countries. Greece has the lowest ranking among OECD countries (44th place), and Mauritius has the highest among African countries (48th place). Russia is in 53rd place.

Russia looks like a country in an intermediate position. According to estimates from various sociological services, in 2000, only about 7 million Russians accessed the Internet at least once in their lives. The number of regular users in 2000 was significantly less - about 3 million people. Nevertheless, the pace of Internet development in Russia is quite satisfactory. Thus, according to the Comcon-2 agency, the Internet audience in Russia increased 2.5 times in 1999–2000. In addition, as the ROCIT agency has established, at least 12 million Russians want to become Internet users.

In 2001, there were already 4.3 million regular Internet users in Russia, and 12 million resorted to its services as needed. In total, the volume of services provided in the Russian segment of the Internet was estimated at 220 million US dollars, which was 50% more than in 2000.

In 2002, the Russian computer park increased by 20% - to 9 computers per 100 people. This was announced by the Minister of the Russian Federation for Communications and Information, Leonid Reiman, in his report to the expanded board of the Ministry of Communications.

The number of Internet users in 2002 increased by 39% and reached 6 million people, which is 4.2% of the country's population. The volume of the domestic information technology market grew by 9% and amounted to more than 4 billion US dollars10.

“In order to maintain its place in the civilized world, Russia cannot ignore these new realities. The decisive factor in national development is access to modern education and new information and communication technologies,” notes Ya.N. Zasursky. Experts and politicians understand this today.

So far, our country lags behind the advanced Western countries in almost all main areas of informatization: software, the number of personal computers, communication systems, load levels and the number of operating information systems.

The divide between those who use and do not use the Internet lies along the “city-rural” line: the Russian Internet audience in July–September 2000 amounted to 3.1 million people, of which 2.8 million were residents of large and medium-sized cities. cities, primarily Moscow, St. Petersburg and Yekaterinburg.

Another aspect of the digital stratification by geography just described is the size of the cities in which respondents lived, i.e. Internet users. In 1997, 57% of respondents lived in cities with a population of more than a million; 13% – in cities with a population of 500 thousand to 1 million; 10% – in cities with a population of 300 to 500 thousand; 12% - in cities with a population of 100 to 300 thousand and only 7% - in cities and towns with a population of less than 100 thousand people. Remote areas, small towns and rural areas have been and remain unattractive markets for the provision of Internet access services.

Among Russian Internet users, as studies have shown, men dominate. In St. Petersburg, for example, in mid-1997 they made up more than 80% of the Internet audience12. Now the situation is changing.

Naturally, all the noted manifestations of digital stratification can be explained by the low standard of living of the bulk of the able-bodied population of Russia. 40 million Russians live in poverty, and only effective demand can lead to the spread of information and communication technologies in households.

Citizens’ access to information that interests them is an indispensable condition for the formation of civil society, which most developed countries, including Russia, strive for. For the first time in world history, a situation is emerging in which any person, regardless of the country where he lives, nationality, age, etc., can be a “citizen of the world” by trading, communicating or receiving information from anywhere in the world. It is no coincidence that much attention is paid today in developed countries, for example, in the USA, Japan, Germany or Canada, to the issue of preparing schoolchildren for the electronic future.

The unlimited possibilities of dialogue on the Internet are changing the mentality, as well as the skills of mutual understanding and interaction of millions of people, turning them into active participants in communication who prefer this type of communication to any other. According to the observations of Russian scientists, it is communication with feedback that contributes to the development of mutual understanding skills between people, which they transfer into real life. Thus, the social benefit of expanding the dialogue space on the Internet is undeniable.

Access to the Internet not only opens up economic opportunities, but also has an increasingly significant impact on social development. Information technologies contribute to the development of distance learning. Internet medicine can provide access to up-to-date health information to doctors and patients in the most remote regions of the country.

Digital inequality entails a clear social disadvantage and exacerbates sociocultural differences between people who have and do not have access to the Internet. This inequality reflects the contradictions of the modern era. It has a material basis, which is rooted in economic relations within countries and in the gap between them in the international arena; it testifies to cultural differences and political differentiations. It also reflects other aspects of existence, such as ethnic, geographical, demographic characteristics of people and societies.

At the same time, the information space has enormous potential for developing the capabilities of states to overcome these and other contradictions. The exchange of information in electronic format creates that virtual reality that makes humanity a global community, promotes the movement of capital, and therefore the equalization of regional economies, and forms a unified approach to values, regardless of national differences between people. “Globalization,” notes Professor Ya.N. Zasursky, does not necessarily mean standardization and unification of the world. The Internet opens up opportunities for the creation of many global networks not only for large countries and peoples, but also for small ethnic groups, helping to maintain connections among diasporas scattered around the world.”

The situation in the field of information technology is changing rapidly. New opportunities create the preconditions for the development of individuals and society. Virtual space opens up the opportunity for countries that were not leaders on the world stage to get ahead and determine the formation of modern civilization.

At the same time, the development of new technologies requires significant efforts and modernization from the individual and from society. The contradictions of the new stage are based on already existing social distances, which are determined by the level of education, the geography of residence of population groups, their ethnicity, and level of socialization.

Information technology, therefore, in itself is neither a problem nor a benefit for countries and peoples. They contain great potential for the further development of humanity, overcoming existing contradictions in the sphere of politics and economics, but can, on the contrary, cause deepening differences between people - between those who will take advantage of the achievements of the 21st century and those who will not be able to take advantage of them.

Digital Divide is defined as the stratification of society and states to the extent possible to receive and use information transmitted through new information and communication technologies.

 digital inequality hinders not only those who find themselves in the “second echelon”, but also the countries of the new information order themselves in achieving peace and stability, strengthening their own security: information technologies make states dependent on equipment and technology, vulnerable to external influences and terrorist attacks ;

 the digital divide simultaneously serves as a field of interaction for cooperation between states with different levels of information and communication equipment;

 digital inequality, however, is not a consequence of linear social processes. Countries with strong economies and developed institutions of politics and law have limited preferences in the information sphere, while small and even backward states that began to develop new technologies were able to dramatically jump ahead, give impetus to the development of their economies, and improve the well-being of citizens;

 digital inequality is overcome by changing the mentality of citizens and social institutions, primarily business; new education helps more and more people access the possibilities of the Internet; the activity of entrepreneurs makes it possible to achieve a breakthrough in the development of global information technology markets: the successful development of firms, their partners and related suppliers begins to determine the behavior and preferences of citizens who, after a short time without the Internet, cannot imagine either public administration, or the education system, or their economy countries;

 digital inequality is also being overcome thanks to targeted government policies; Today, so-called e-governments are being created everywhere, which refers to new ways of interaction between citizens and government bodies using information technology.

International relations are being modernized; they are based on the exchange of information, and this goes “above barriers”: the uncontrolled virtual space is equally accessible to any user connected to the Internet, regardless of his location.

 Generally existing in the USA digital layering is characterized by the following:

 college or university graduates have eight times more computers at home than those who only graduated from high school, and among the latter, the number of those with Internet access is 16 times less than among the former;

 the number of high-income families living in urban regions with access to the Internet is twenty times greater than similarly equipped families in rural and low-income regions;

 children in low-income white families are three times more likely to use the Internet compared to similar black families and four times more likely to use the Internet compared to families of Hispanic origin;

 Rich families on the US Pacific Coast have 13 times more home computers than poor black families and are 34 times more likely to use the Internet;

 children in white two-parent families are twice as likely to use the Internet than children in white one-parent families; Children in two-parent black families have nearly four times more access to the Internet than children in single-parent black families.

The presence of digital stratification leads to inequality among citizens not only in receiving the latest types of services provided via the Internet, but also in realizing the constitutional right to equal access to state information resources. Concern about the digital divide in the United States exists at all levels of government, and is seen by the American government and the private sector as key to the future of the country.

There are also special factors, different from those traditionally considered, that determine the uneven distribution of information and communication technologies. This is confirmed by the examples of those countries that, economically or politically, have never been influential on the world stage and only now, thanks to the development of the information technology market, have rapidly taken the lead, becoming leading suppliers of technology and “trend setters” in establishing a new lifestyle. The divide between those who use and do not use the Internet lies along the “city-rural” line: the Russian Internet audience in July–September 2000 amounted to 3.1 million people, of which 2.8 million were residents of large and medium-sized cities. cities, primarily Moscow, St. Petersburg and Yekaterinburg

Remote areas, small towns and rural areas have been and remain unattractive markets for the provision of Internet access services.

Among Russian Internet users, as studies have shown, men dominate. In St. Petersburg, for example, in mid-1997 they made up more than 80% of the Internet audience. Now the situation is changing.