Hardly a day passes when the San Francisco Chronicle doesn't run some sort of article having to do with the Internet. The same is true for most other mainstream mass media, not to mention the proliferation of special interest magazines dedicated to the topic. There is no question that the Internet has become a hot topic of the mid-nineties, popping up in discourse from economic policy to political policy to civil rights to education, and so on. Nearly every facet of modern life stands to be affected by the Internet if it hasn't been already.
Now, in 1996, society stands on the cusp of a future full of computer-mediated communication, guided by the popularity and the relative technical efficiency of the Internet. If the Internet is to have the potential to realign social life as many pundits claim, it is worth investigating the inroads it has already made in becoming an important, perhaps integral, communications medium. Its history, though young, can reveal the type of potential it has to truly be a new communications paradigm. Proponents of the Internet may spout optimism about how the Internet stands to revolutionize modern life, but it is necessary to examine how it has already begun doing so. This examination may give clues to future integration trends, or it may suggest that more needs to be done in order to truly integrate the Internet as a ubiquitous facet of modern life.
Statistics measuring Internet usage populations tend to vary widely, mostly because the nature of the Internet makes it difficult to measure such numbers. Most of the data comes from marketers who, eager to tap into the Internet as a lucrative marketplace, are eagerly pushing the envelope in measurement techniques. Several Internet demographic studies were released in 1995 and early 1996 that put the Internet user population figure at anywhere from 8.4 million users [FIND/SVP, 1995-6] to 16.4 million [Hoffman, 1996]1 to 28 million [Yankelovich, 1995-6], depending on how each study defined an "Internet user." Regardless of the exact number, it is safe to say that there are millions of people who use the Internet. However, there are many millions more who are NOT using the Internet, thus warranting studies such as this one to address the issues of how or why they are not using it.
Nearly all of the current studies find that Internet usage is most prevalent amongst younger, more educated people [Hoffman, 1996; Yankelovich, 1995-6] 2. Based on that fact, and the convenience of the sample, this particular study surveyed students at the University of California at Berkeley [henceforth referred to as "UCB"] to see if and how they were using the Internet and examine what factors might have been influencing their Internet usage.
The sample comprised mostly of undergraduates of varying ethnicities, economic backgrounds and academic disciplines. Because education was eliminated as a variable, cost and education [in this case education refers to the skills and instruction necessary to use the Internet] should not have been factors to them using the Internet, two major factors that normally prevent people from adopting information technology, since the University provides access to both computers and classes on how to use them.
However, the results showed that while the respondents overwhelmingly see the Internet as being an important communications medium in the future, a considerable number of those sampled had not yet adopted it into their lives. Moreover, those who did fall into the category of Internet "users" did not necessarily adopt it into their lives into a uniform manner despite having equal opportunity to.3.
The data suggested that while the University played a passive role in shaping Internet usage by providing access to it, if and how people seized the opportunity to use it depended on other factors particular to the individuals. The factors chosen for examination in particular are gender, economic background, and race. Each group was analyzed to see what proportion used the Internet, and then the users within each group were examined to see if the usage patterns were similar. It became clear that the University was not a great "equalizer" of the other social factors, nor was it a strong, overt influence in shaping its students' behavior.
There are two major theories which can shed some light on why the adoption patterns were not uniform. One is a theory from mass media research which is known as the uses and gratifications theory. This theory was originally derived as a way to dispel mass media observers who felt that mass media had simple, direct and unavoidable behavioral results on the audience. This theory took the emphasis away from the message4 itself and instead focused on the audience.5. As the name of this theory suggests, with uses and gratifications theory the audience "uses" a medium only as it serves its interests and/or satisfies a need. This idea, when applied to traditional mass communications, can help explain why people watch certain types of television. In the case of this survey, this theory can explain why certain people were drawn to using the Internet and why certain people used it in certain ways.
The other helpful theory comes from the area of social research known as "diffusion of innovations." In his pioneering work, Rogers [1995] described the process for an innovation to become a fixture in society. First the innovation must be developed, and then people need to be exposed to it, but whether or not this innovation will be truly "diffused" throughout society is a much more complex matter very much dependent on the individuals - the "adopters" - themselves. This theory pertains to this study in that if the Internet is to play a strong role in society, then it has to become evenly diffused throughout society, much as the telephone and television are currently. As a communications medium and as a technology, the Internet must be adopted uniformly by the entire society in both its physical technology and its uses before it can be of any service to society.
After analyzing the data from this study, this paper concludes by discussing some of the potential implications of the data on the future of the Internet as a diffused and potentially socially equalizing medium.
Back to Contents
Next Section
cathyg@csua.berkeley.edu
http://www.csua.berkeley.edu/~cathyg