Appendix B Understanding Mass and Mediated Communication^549Digital Disparities
Back in 1995, a mere 3 percent of Americans had used the Internet; by 2012,
almost 80 percent had. Compared to any other technology of the last century,
that is quite a rapid penetration into the population, and the numbers of Inter-
net users continue to grow across all demographic groups (Zickuhr & Smith,
2012). Even Americans of lower socioeconomic status now typically have access
to at least some digital technology, including Internet and mobile phones. How-
ever, there are still some important digital disparities in terms of regular access
to broadband connections or usage of multiple digital devices. For example,
although low-income Americans may have a smartphone, that phone is often
their sole digital device, which means that they are limited in their ability to do
extensive Web searching or computer-based activities (such as writing papers for
school) (Schradie, 2013). Even among those with similar levels of access, there
are differences in how much use and participation they do online—younger
adults and those with higher incomes and education are the ones who take the
most advantage of online technology (Zickuhr & Smith, 2012).Ineffective Participation
When Amy’s twin girls were born almost three months prematurely, her
husband Vern got online right away to find out everything he could about
“preemies.” But his search quickly became overwhelming: for every opinion in
one direction, there seemed to be someone else giving the opposite advice. The
sheer volume of messages made available by converging media can lead to in-
formation overload, the difficulty in sorting through and making sense of vast
amounts of information. Pavlik and McIntosh (2013) argue that, apart from
the difficulty for individuals, information overload can also hinder the abil-
ity of government agencies to act on shared information and make it difficult
for employees to share information effectively within their companies. Media
multitasking can exacerbate the problem, as studies show that multitasking
hinders our ability to attend to and focus on the information we most need
(Ralph, Thomson, Cheyne, & Smilek, 2013).
It can also be difficult to evaluate the quality of information in converging me-
dia. Some information online is edited by professional journalists, some is user con-
tributed and edited (such as Wikipedia), and some is unedited information posted
on forums, blogs, or personal Web sites. Rumors, hoaxes,
and conspiracy theories abound (catalogued and investi-
gated at Snopes.com). The potential for effective citizen
participation is limited when users create or distribute
false or other dangerous kinds of information online.
Participation is also ineffective when users fail to
think critically about the information they find on the
Internet. Much like with the traditional media, a site
that looks credible, with professional design and impres-
sive depth of content, may be given higher credence even
if it might otherwise be suspect given its origins or spon-
sorship (Flanagin & Metzger, 2007). To make good on
the promises of digital media for social and political par-
ticipation, we need to devote our attention to the quality
of our own and others’ mediated communication.THIS ERA MAY well be
considered the “Too Much
Information Age,” as converging
media deliver more content than
we can process. Getty Images/Flickr19_OHA_45766_App_B_530_556.indd 54919_OHA_45766_App_B_530_556.indd 549 13/10/14 5:39 PM13/10/14 5:39 PM