The document analyzes perspectives on globalization and the digital divide from Thomas Friedman's The World is Flat and other sources. It discusses how definitions of the digital divide vary and how issues like corporate responsibility, Western influence in developing countries, and inclusion of marginalized groups must be considered. While Friedman is optimistic about globalization, other researchers address more negative impacts and complex societal factors that must be understood to effectively address the digital divide on a global scale.

1. SHIFTING SANDS: GLOBALIZATION AND DIGITAL EQUITY 1
Running head: Shifting Sands: Globalization, Equity, and the Current State of the Digital Divide
Shifting Sands: Globalization and Digital Equity
Colleen M. Ites
Iowa State University
4 March 2011

2. SHIFTING SANDS: GLOBALIZATION AND DIGITAL EQUITY 2
ABSTRACT
Current views of globalization and its impact on digital equity have been hot-button topics for the
last decade. The publication of Thomas Friedman’s The World Is Flat in 2005 took an issue that had
previously been in the academic fields of education and economics and brought it to the American
forefront. The fears of globalization as a method of removing the United States’ traditional world
domination in the economic sector were directly and frankly confronted, as well as the role American
education must fulfill to give future world citizens the best possible chances at future careers.
Throughout the work Friedman argues that while a difficult process, acceptance of globalization
would be a benefit for Americans overall.
This article will address the optimistic ideals found in Friedman’s book by comparing it with other
current research on theories surrounding the digital divide, globalization, the Western influence on
developing nations, and the social responsibilities of multinational corporations. Important questions
addressed after an initial analysis of the review of literature will include the following:
• What is the true definition of the digital divide and is this divide constant or changing?
• To what extent are the ideas of globalization intertwined with corporate responsibility? Does
that responsibility extend to workers in developing countries, and how should this
responsibility be monitored or maintained on a global level?
• How much of an influence should the Western world have in developing countries, as most
of the digital growth has initiated in the West?
• How does bridging the digital divide include those who are often on society’s fringes?
Keywords: digital divide, globalization, digital equity, technology implementation

3. SHIFTING SANDS: GLOBALIZATION AND DIGITAL EQUITY 3
Shifting Sands: Globalization and Digital Equity
INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF LITERATURE
In this essay the author will compare the ideas found in Friedman’s work with alternative
ideas on globalization and the digital divide, and explain possible ‘fixes’ for these complicated
issues. The issues of digital equity are addressed in James McShay's chapter “Paulo Freire’s
Liberatory Pedagogy: Rethinking Issues of Technology Access and Use in Education” where the
author discusses the need for a shift from thinking about technology access and use toward
thinking of technology as a form of Freire’s liberatory media, enabling repressed peoples the
potential for freedom and social change. Jill Jameson also draws on Freirean’s critical pedagogy
as she analyzes attempts at addressing the digital divide in Zimbabwe while taking into account
the country’s violent and impoverished past and present in her chapter “The Digital Abyss in
Zimbabwe.” Francesco Amoretti and Fortunato Musella in their chapter “Governing Digital
Divides: Power Structures and ICT Strategies in a Global Perspective” discuss the impact
Western ICT providers and growth has had on nations around the world and if the dependence of
developing countries on Western ICT providers puts them as risk of becoming technology
colonies to the West. All chapters are found in International Exploration of Technology Equity
and the Digital Divide, a collection of varying viewpoints and theories surrounding the concept
of digital equity edited by Patricia R. Leigh.
The final works used in this article will give specific and detailed alternatives to the
‘automatic promise’ of closing the digital divide found in Friedman’s work. In Paul C. Gorski’s
“Insisting on Digital Equity: Reframing the Dominant Discourse on Multicultural Education and
Technology,” the author argues that the issues of digital inequities must be faced and addressed

4. SHIFTING SANDS: GLOBALIZATION AND DIGITAL EQUITY 4
before the digital divide can be overcome. Don Fallis argues for the application of epistemic
value theory to apply a value to knowledge learned through the implementation and use of
technology in his article, “Epistemic Value Theory and the Digital Divide.” And finally, an
examination of the impact technology has had on the complex caste society found in India is
found in Elizabeth Langran’s article “Caste, Class, and IT in India.” All the resources above will
be examined and analyzed to determine if the digital divide is growing or closing.
ANALYSIS AND CONCEPTUAL DISCUSSIONS
While all these texts address various interpretations of the term “digital divide” there is
no one steadfast definition for this concept. Friedman defines digital divide as the technological
differences found between those who have access to and have embraced new and emerging
communication and business technologies. He argues that the digital divide is shrinking is based
on the implementation of new technologies by specific sectors of societies in developing
countries and how those in these sectors are utilizing these new technologies to better their lives
and the economic health of their country. He uses economic and industrial centers in India and
China to make his point: multinationals and home-grown companies developed methods of
outsourcing and off-shoring that brought about the ‘flattening’ process Friedman espouses
throughout the book (Friedman, 2005 p. 126-151).
Friedman’s definition is similar to the ‘accepted’ definition used by pundits and news
media all over the world, but new research on the topic intends to broaden and deepen the
definition of an idea that seems simple but is actually quite complicated. McShay uses the
Freire’s liberatory pedagogy to expand the definition from the access to and use of new
technologies to addressing the actual technology as an agent of liberation and a catalyst for social
change to disenfranchised peoples around the world (2010 p. 138). In this example the

5. SHIFTING SANDS: GLOBALIZATION AND DIGITAL EQUITY 5
technology itself is a tool for providing educational and legal opportunities to those previously
overlooked in the new global economy, especially those of color, impoverished, or in a lowered
social ranking. This idea of using the language surrounding technology advances as a guidepost
for state development in poor nations is groundbreaking and will require an entire new viewpoint
on the idea of the digital divide.
The fear of developing a form of digital colonization by allowing Western information and
technology companies (ICTs) to control diffusion of new technologies in developing countries is
covered in depth by Amoretti and Musella (2010 p.193). This article espouses that the attempts
to use ICT as a method of reducing the digital divide is in effect providing a greater resource to
the elites found in developing countries, therefore making the digital divide greater than before.
This inequity between the educated elite and less-educated (usually rural) poor in such countries
takes into account how the digital divide is also a separation of social and democratic rights, and
argues that gaps in funding and infrastructures in developing countries must be addressed before
the digital divide can begin to close (Amoretti and Musella, 2010 pp. 196-198).
Specific countries serve as excellent examples of the complex interactions between the digital
divide and globalization. Zimbabwe is one of the poorest, most disorganized, and violent
countries in Africa today. Attempts at normalization and establishment of a democracy
following British colonial rule have been marred by the despot Mugabe, civil unrest, an epidemic
of HIV/AIDS, and a lack of natural resources. These factors all contribute to Zimbabwe’s
complete lack of “ ‘network readiness’ in ICT … in comparison with (other) African countries
… which have overtaken its capability amongst the ‘bottom 20’ “ nations in the 2008 - 2009
Global Information Technology Report (GITR) (Jameson, 2010 p.115). This with other ranking
accounts leads Zimbabwe to the dubious title of “least developed nation in the world for ICT”

6. SHIFTING SANDS: GLOBALIZATION AND DIGITAL EQUITY 6
(Jameson, 2010 p.117). These factors have also led Zimbabwe to become less informed and
therefore more isolated from the rest of the world; this generational lack of information has led
the oppressed peoples to not strive for freedom but instead to become cogs in the machinery of
violence and oppression. They oppressed fight instead to become the oppressors (Jameson, 2010
pp. 123-125). While Jameson argues that Freire’s praxis for positive change could lead to a
greater change in Zimbabwe, because of the country’s nearly complete disenfranchisement from
the developed world, those who would institute this change must be dependent on other states to
begin to close the digital divide (2010 pp. 123-128). In this example, globalization has given up
on Zimbabwe, as her own people have given up on her, people who have instead chosen to
become displaced persons in search of skills to rebuild Zimbabwe. One issue not confronted in
the article was how those in power in Zimbabwe (often through bribes and illegal disbursement
of funds) would potentially deal with these newly skilled citizens ‘upending the apple cart’ in
terms of power. As with every society, those who hold the power will rule the people. The great
attention to detail given every other aspect of this article makes the lack of attention given to this
potential threat disturbing.
Gorski directly addresses the issued of the digital divide as hinging on the digital
inequities that are evident for all peoples on the fringes of societies. His proposal for continual
multicultural education is a combination of multicultural education and social reconstructionism.
Gorski cautions educators to carefully consider if the implementation of new innovations will
enrich and enable multicultural education or if it will create further inequalities between the
advantages and disadvantaged in American education. He also directs educators to dig deep into
honestly defining the multicultural education, the digital divide, access to technology, and digital
inequities (Gorski, 2008 pp.350-356).The issues that spoke most to me where how educators

7. SHIFTING SANDS: GLOBALIZATION AND DIGITAL EQUITY 7
needs to create non-hostile digital cultures designed to be safe places of learning for all
regardless of previous digital cultural norms. This addressed the issues of educating female,
minority, and impoverished students in a way that was not even regarded by the Friedman text.
The inclusion of these specific groups was a welcome addition to the current study of digital
inequities by displaying to educators specific areas of concern regarding implementation of
digital innovations.
Elizabeth Lungran addresses these same issues of digital inequities specific to India and
utilizes comparisons to Thomas Friedmans’ The World Is Flat within her article. She argues that
providing access without considering the issues of class, caste, and power will never allow for
the ultimate flattening of all in India. If technologies are implemented and a blind eye is turned
toward these issues, the digital divide will continue to grow with the potential to result in
political instability and localized isolation of social groups already on the fringes of society
(2011 pp.5-7). Lungran also touches on the specific needs of women in a society where gender
issues abound. Finally, she addresses the issues specific to the caste system, class hierarchies,
and the rising divide between the digerati and the common, poor Indian (2011 pp.7-12). In her
conclusions Lungran agrees with Friedman regarding necessary improvements to the Indian
school system, removal of bureaucratic and academic barriers, and creation of a domestic market
for software as the best ways to diffuse knowledge to the ‘have-nots’ of India. That being said,
she did disagree with Friedman regarding the infusion of new capital back into the Indian
economy: Lungran argues that these previous steps are necessary in order for change to occur
while Friedman believes it is already occurring (2011 13-15; Friedman, 2005 pp.425, 479-482).
A final common ground between Lungran and Freidman is in regards to corporate
responsibilities for multinational corporations. Friedman believes that multinationals need to

8. SHIFTING SANDS: GLOBALIZATION AND DIGITAL EQUITY 8
offer workers a safe environment with adequate pay (2005 p, 425), and Lungran also believes
this to be true (2011 p.16). The final difference is regarding the moral value of globalization,
where both give excellent factual supports for his and her points of view. These all comprise the
complicated state of globalization and the digital divide today, as well as the potential solutions
to these problems.
While many articles espouse theories on how to truly define the digital divide and
implement globalization effectively in developing countries, Don Fallis proposes the use of a
mathematic methodology epistemology value theory to measure the distribution of knowledge
and the value of access to information technology (2007 pp.30-31). This quantification is
measurable once the distribution of knowledge regarding differing digital divide policies to
determine which (if any) are most effective based on the types of implementation and societies
encountered. He has two solid arguments comparing differing distributions of knowledge:
utilitarian, with the maximized average amount of cumulative societal knowledge, egalitarian, an
attempt to distribute knowledge equally to all members of society, Rawlsian, where inequities
among members of a society are accepted as long as those less informed receive the greatest
increase in knowledge (Fallis, 2007 31-35). While this scientific measurement of the distribution
of new knowledge may seem like a guaranteed way to solve the digital divide, Fallis cautions the
reader regarding acquirement of new knowledge harming previous social, religious, and cultural
norms is a raw reality in the flattening of the world as we know it (2007 pp.35-39). While
Feinstein does address the changes that technology diffusion may bring to local communities and
cultures, his positive spin on creating policies that honor these traditions while implementing
new technologies would require a scientific scaffold such as Fallis’ theory to establish an
effective implementation.

9. SHIFTING SANDS: GLOBALIZATION AND DIGITAL EQUITY 9
CONCLUSION
Each of these authors feels passionate about the impact of globalization and the digital divide
on different cultures throughout the world. Overall Friedman’s book is perhaps too optimistic at
the long-term effects of globalization. This is seen in his minimal accounts of the negative
impacts of new innovations on the cultural, local economic, and religious peoples of the world.
When Friedman does address this issue, he tends to give examples of extremists, such as the rise
of militant Islam and Al-Qaeda in the Middle East and Africa. This is a typical tactic of
Friedman’s regarding the darker side of globalization. While the book has a positive tone, he
does slip in some of the more negative aspects, including the sometimes lack of corporate
responsibility in a globalized world (2005 pp. 151-166), while in the same breath extolling the
virtues of the same company. For example, he discusses how the Gates Foundation is a
multinational that can be seen as controlling and rigid but that has done wonders for public
health all over the world when wealthy nations would not step up to the challenge (2005
pp.541-545). This process of partnering a negative aspect of globalization followed by a positive
one is an excellent way to slip bias past the reader to convince him or her to take a positive tone
or spin away from the book.
The chapters from Leigh’s book and the other articles do not use as much sugar-coating
as Friedman does. Instead, they often pick out specific cultural, gender, social, and economic
issues upon which to build the research of and attitudes toward globalization and attempts at
closing the digital divide. These same articles require the reading to really look at the long-
standing effects of globalization regarding digital equity and recommend that further research in
this field do the same.

10. SHIFTING SANDS: GLOBALIZATION AND DIGITAL EQUITY 10
Perhaps the greatest difference between Friedman and the other texts is how much time
Friedman spends explaining how all American schools need to change. McShay addresses the
unique needs of multicultural education and Gorski discusses the need to revamp definitions and
applications of new technologies, but Friedman far and away has the deepest and broadest
opinion on what is wrong in American education today. That being said, he offers many errors
and few solutions. The articles and chapters give more potential solutions to these issues as well
as others including the best ways to implement new technologies for specific groups and how to
address unique student and societal needs in technology education. They also address the
somewhat uncomfortable issue of developing countries becoming dependent on wealthier ones
for assistance in implementing new technologies, creating a new form of digital colonialism.
The awareness of how best to address these issues will be the guiding force for future
educational technologists and researchers. Technologists then must use this awareness along
with research results to make changes to the implementation, type, and dispersal of new
innovations to specific cultures and groups. Perhaps the best solution is to incorporate the Freier
pedagogy toward innovation implementation or the application of epistemic value theory toward
the overall accumulation of knowledge. As the shifting sands of information and communication
technologies continue to evolve and expand, it will require a broad and deep analysis of what has
and has and has not worked, minus emotional bias, to help educational researchers determine the
best solutions in successfully overcoming the digital divide. The greater emphasis recently
placed on the complex interactions of culture, tradition, religion, SES, understanding and
application of new technologies is a first step in the right direction.

11. SHIFTING SANDS: GLOBALIZATION AND DIGITAL EQUITY 11
REFERENCES
Amoretti, F & Musella F. (2011). Power structures and ICT strategies in a global perspective. In
P. R. Leigh (Ed.). International explorations of technology equity and the digital divide:
Critical, historical, and social perspectives. Hershey. PA: IGI Global.
Fallis, D. (2007). Epistemic value theory and the digital divide. In E. Rooksby & J. Weckert
(Eds.) Information technology and social justice, pp. 29-46. Hershey, PA: Information
Science Publishing.
Friedman, Thomas L. (2005). The world is flat. New York: Picador.
Gorski, P. C. (2009). Insisting on digital equity: Reframing the dominant discourse on
multicultural education and technology. Urban education, 44(3), pp. 348-364.
Jameson, J. (2011). The digital abyss in Zimbabwe. In P. R. Leigh (Ed.). International
explorations of technology equity and the digital divide: Critical, historical, and social
perspectives. Hershey. PA: IGI Global.
Langran, E. K. (2011). Caste, class, and IT in India. In P. R. Leigh (Ed.). International
explorations of technology equity and the digital divide: Critical, historical, and social
perspectives. Hershey. PA: IGI Global.
McShay, J. C. (2011). Paulo Freire's liberatory pedagogy: Rethinking issues of technology. In P.
R. Leigh (Ed.). International explorations of technology equity and the digital divide:
Critical, historical, and social perspectives. Hershey. PA: IGI Global.