Comp 106 Critical Essay

When Vaidhyanathan writes that those who are comfortable with and excel at using digital technology tend to be those who are “socio-economically privileged, English-speaking, white, and male” he is asserting a generalization that I believe to be true. There will always be exceptions to the rule, but Vaidhyanathan is just stating a general guideline. I believe that the assertion is correct for the majority of people. While not progressive, it is honest without being condescending.

I believe his argument is correct because it is supported by the research of Eszter Hargittai, an expert on digital communication. Young people can only become “Web-savvy” if they have a computer readily available to them, and access to the internet. This rules out many people who do not have the finances to afford these luxuries, or people who’s local schools or community centers do not have the adequate funding for this. So, in order for young people to be very familiar and comfortable with navigating the web, the will need to be socio-economically privileged.

Although I don’t think it is any kind of requirement that a person be English-speaking in order to be “digitally adept,” I believe Vaidhyanathan was correct when he listed it as one of the top groups of people who tend to understand more about digital technology. English-speaking countries are some of the wealthiest countries, which causes digital technology to be more easily accessible to young people. When young people are able to gain experience using digital technology, they become more skilled at it.

It makes sense to me that white young people would be more comfortable with using digital technology because, in America, majorities tend to be wealthier than minorities, so white people would most-likely have easier access to computers and the internet. While all types of people could excel when using digital technology, young people in minority groups are usually not given the opportunities and the exposure to digital technology that majority groups are.

The most-likely explanation to why “digitally adept young people” tend to be male is that they are usually drawn to technology and figuring things out more than females are. This could be attributed to the nature of males in general, or it could be attributed to the history of males being involved in mathematics and scientific studies more than females are. Males would enjoy figuring out things on a computer or other digital technology the way they usually enjoy building things or figuring out how things work. While this is purely speculation, it is displayed when one observes how male-dominated the sciences are.

I don’t believe that Vaidhyanathan’s argument is progressive, but if he were to make a statement that all people excel at using digital technology it would’ve been a lie. In order to make a more progressive statement, Vaidhyanathan could’ve mentioned that as time goes on the numbers of less socio-economically privileged and minority groups that are gaining a good understanding of digital technology are continually increasing. He also could’ve said that many programs have been created to bring better digital technology and other resources to underprivileged American classrooms. It would’ve been easy for Vaidhyanathan to say something more progressive, but I do not believe there is anything wrong with what he did say. He was simply reiterating a conversation that he heard in which a well-known expert on digital communication was answering a question honestly.

Some people may feel that the argument that people who understand digital technology more tend to be socio-economically privileged, English-speaking, white, and male, offensive or condescending, but I don’t believe it was intended to be either of those things. Simply stating which groups tend to have more skill when dealing with digital things doesn’t mean that they are any smarter or have a better capacity to understand or learn things. Because the people who are more comfortable and skilled at using digital technology are those who are exposed to it more, the argument is more or less telling who has easier access to digital technology. Those who are offended should remember that it is a generalization, and does not apply to every individual.

Breaking down all the varieties of people in the world into groups may seem simple. Because every person is so unique and has a different background and upbringing than everyone else, not every person fits easily into a group. However, the groups used in the argument are so general that many people can fit into them. Vaidhyanathan’s argument is not oversimplified. It is a generalization that is usually true and gives us insight into who is taking the most advantage of digital technology.