{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.022576878162709226, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0027247956403269754, 'mean_word_length': 4.9906759906759905, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Clear Thinking on the Digital Divide

As consumer products are introduced, adoption rates tend to vary across socioeconomic groups. In the case of computers and Internet access, these gaps have been termed by many the "digital divide." People with higher incomes and more education have substantially greater rates of access to technology. Likewise, whites and city-dwellers are more likely to have computers and Internet access than non-whites and those who live outside metropolitan areas. As with many other products and services, technology is not equally distributed. Over the past five years, a series of digital divide reports by the U.S. Department of Commerce 1 has focused attention on the issue and led to a variety of programs aimed at increasing the number of Americans owning a computer and connected to the Internet. But in spite of a surfeit of data on the issue, interpretation of these numbers has yielded anything but consensus. On the one hand, liberals, seeking stronger government action have used the data to paint a pessimistic picture, pointing to figures that suggest the gaps between rich and poor and between whites and minorities are growing. In contrast, conservatives seeking to challenge any case for intervention, have painted a much more optimistic view, arguing that uptake rates are growing for even the poorest. As government considers how it might respond to gaps in computer and Internet access, it needs to base its decisions on clear thinking that objectively examines what has happened with past technologies, what is happening now, what is likely to happen, and what, if anything, justifies government action. This paper places the issue of technological diffusion in historical perspective-first, by analyzing the extent to which various technological divides have changed over recent years and, second, by comparing changes in the rate of penetration of these technologies with four earlier innovations-telephones, radios, televisions, and VCRs. While history is not a perfect guide to the future, it can help us predict how rapidly technological adoption will occur. For example, if today's social commentators were transported back 50 years when TV was in its infancy, they would have seen what might have been called a "TV divide" between rich television owners and poor non-owners. Yet 10 years later, the TV divide was essentially bridged as the number of Americans with television sets skyrocketed. On the other hand, if those same commentators were taken back 75 years, they would see another divide, this time over …