Digital Modernization And Digital Capitalism

1318 Words6 Pages
This paper aims to scrutinize the disunion or ‘digital gap’ based on: (1) the digital natives and digital immigrants, both of the terms coined by Prensky (2001), and (2) the elite digital natives and the underprivileged digital natives, in the context of digital modernization and digital capitalism. This paper will include the individual nature of digital modernization and digital capitalism, and will also observe how and why they are the cause of the disunion between the chosen variables. This paper will feature and properly credit the different studies and articles relating to the topic that help in shedding light to diverse perspectives and opinion. According to Kuruvilla (2015), digital modernization is the act of continual upgrading or…show more content…
Modernization is seen in the development of television, from the television’s first manufacture during the 1928 to the current times. Dunne (2014) gave a brief summary to the evolution: “[…] buttons replaces knobs and dials, profiles got slimmer, and sleek black replaced colorful frames. TVs […] became smart (para. 4).” Dunne (2014) added how back then, televisions were only seen in wealthy people’s home, but today, it is already one of the common furniture seen in every household. Digital Capitalism, as what an article from the Net supplied, is the “transition to another set of economic principles” into a cyber-opportune platform—the Internet (as cited in Schiller, 1999). Schiller (1999) provided that the Internet is the main incentive needed of this new “political-economic transition” (p. 5) and of unequal and disadvantageous modifications over the population. Norris (2000) proved the importance of the Internet statement by enumerating its capabilities: […]The interactivity of the medium, the speed of electronic communications, the global reach of the net shrinking spatial distances, the greater choice of information on the web, and the ability of anyone to publish their own content online with a minimal role for gatekeepers (para.…show more content…
However, there are different reactions towards the digital activity coming from different people, creating a gap among the society. For clarity, various scholars grouped them according to their respective responses. Prensky (2001) categorized people living in the current century—or otherwise known as digital era—into two main groups: the digital natives and the digital immigrants. According to Prensky (2001), Digital natives are the people exposed to technology, such as the Internet, most of their lives. Prensky named them as such for they are the “native speakers of the digital language” (p. 1). Zur and Zur (2011) also termed the natives as the “iGeneration” (para. 1) or having “digital DNA” (para. 1). Günther (2007) added that natives treat Internet as a medium and use it without confusion. Contrary to the natives, digital immigrants are the people introduced into the digital era, as what Prensky (2001) provided. Prensky claimed that immigrants usually have little appreciation to the enumerable changes brought about by the new technology, although there will be instances where some will be fascinated and immerse themselves into the digital trend. Zur and Zur (2011) stated that digital immigrants are the people born before 1964, or during the pre-computer world, while Prensky (2001) supplied that digital natives are the students from K to
Open Document