Empowerment of Minority and Marginalized Internet Users

I have a meeting at 4:30 and will be late for class so I wanted to present this just in case there is a problem. There comes a time in every class (even Jay's classes) where I'll be reading something and it suddenly "clicks" in my mind and things start to make connections for me. Last week's readings on Design-Based Research were a start, but this week's article really started to bring things together for me. The article, "The Internet for Empowerment of Minority and Marginalized Users," by Mehra, Merkel, and Bishop, is something I could relate to both as an Internet user and from a researcher standpoint. I'm interested in this subject because it relates to a research project I'm involved with and is something I would like to possibly use as the theme of my thesis project.

This article presents findings from three separate studies, using different research methods, on the issues of the "digital divide." To begin, a definition of "digital divide" -- "the troubling gap between those who use computers and the internet and those who do not." (p. 782) This is a simplistic definition and does not begin to cover the multitude of disparate issues related to the use or non-use of Internet technologies. The authors do go on to describe the digital divide as "an important national problem." (p. 782).

The researchers believe that bringing about social change is the ultimate goal of Internet use, and their primary question is to find out how the marginalized members of society use computers and the Internet in their daily lives in ways that are meaningful to them as individuals and members of a marginalized or minority group. (p. 782).

Merkel's study involved low-income families' use of the Internet through a program called the Community Networking Initiative (CNI), which provided training, computers, and internet access to more than 700 low-income families in the Champaign, Illinois, region. For this particular study, data was collected over a one-year period and focus groups were formed. Interviews were conducted with eleven participants, with observational data gathered from classes, community settings, and the homes of eight interview participants. The article focuses on only one of the research subjects, Paul, a low-income single father of three. Merkel makes the distinction between an access-oriented approach and the study approach of "local literacy." Merkel states that it is important to understand informal learning takes place at home and connects to social practices. He looks at the entirety of lived experiences rather than just looking at isolated settings. The method of research was an Ethnographic study using the constant comparative method to analyze the data (Note: I don't really understand what this analysis method is about.)

The researchers found that as the subject's life circumstances changed (in Paul's case, an engagement), the way they use the Internet also changes and that people use the technology in "starts and stops" rather than continuously in the same manner. Paul quickly became the "go-to guy" for his family and friends in technology issues even though his interest in and use of the Internet changed over the period of the study.

The result is that researchers found that "unexpected events in peoples lives often gave rise to the need for people to gain expertise in new literacy areas." (p. 786)

The second study, by Bharat Mehra, looks at how marginalized members of society use the Internet to bring about changes that are meaningful to them personally. This study utilized an analysis of an electronic mailing list (a listserve and e-mail?) of a university Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender (LGBT) community. This group (LGBT) has a history of "oppression, marginalization and exclusion" based on their sexual orientation and the "social vacuum of anonymity" has given rise to great popularity of the Internet among sexual minorities. (p. 787). Mehra points out, however, that existing research is missing a strong focus that makes connections between the "online and offline realities" of marginalized users.

Mehra collected 340 e-mail messages during a two-month period. The e-mails were posted by 57 registered members of the LGBT electronic mailing list used for local events, discussion, and information. A simple content analysis was utilized to categorize the postings according to basic topic, purpose, and other dimensions. Then, informal discussions were held with the users of the mailing list. Some topics included: community problems, barriers to information seeking, specific uses of the mailing list, and actions that they can take to build a better community.

The results show that LGBT members perceive online communications as a method for positive development of their "queer" identities. It also suggests that the Internet is a tool for empowerment of marginalized people in taking charge of their lives.

The third study involves a Participatory Action Research (PAR) methodology with a grassroots organization of African-American women called SisterNet. This type of research allows for more control by individuals who have traditionally been disenfranchised. It allows for participation in "knowledge creation." This study used focus groups for "scenario building as a means of representing and reflecting on the social practices associated with community health and the use of information technologies." (p. 792).

All three of these studies involve some type of action research in creating social change by allowing for changes in the participants' lives without disqualifying them from the study. This is the kind of research that I can most relate to. My primary interest in any future research I may do consists of this type of "social justice" research.