Broadband, Narrow Vision?
From the coordination via social networking websites of protests in Iran, to the phasing out of textbooks in favour of online learning resources in California, to your viewing of this article wherever you are in the world, Internet technology has changed the way we live.
And, whether you think it for better or worse, it will continue to do so.
Indeed, such is the pace of technological advance that the remarkable now quickly becomes commonplace, and up-to-the-minute innovations are ever falling behind the times. Not surprisingly, a gap is emerging between the Internet haves and have-nots.
With a view to closing the gap by making hi-speed broadband more widely available in the UK, the Government this week proposed a levy of 50p per month on all households with a fixed-line telephone. The revenue raised will help fund the huge cost of the necessary upgrade of the nation's Internet cable network. It's just one of the recommendations of the 'Digital Britain' report, that the prime minister believes will make Britain the digital capital of the world.
It seems, on the face of it, like a good idea. If we enjoy the benefits of broadband, and can afford 50p per month to help enable others to enjoy them too, shouldn't we be happy to pay? After all, broadband, Gordon Brown told us this week, is now as essential as water, electricity and gas. Love your neighbour as yourself.
That's all very well if it's our UK or other minority world neighbour; but what about the twenty per cent of our global neighbours who are still without safe drinking water? Should we really be looking to upgrade our technological lifestyle options further while we carry a debt of neighbourly love to so many millions around the world?
This is not for a moment meant to demonise technology. On the contrary, we should rightly receive it as a gift of God, affirming and celebrating the increasing contribution it makes to our human flourishing. It is, though, to question the extent to which technological advances are progressively beating all sense of contentment into retreat, generating a warped perspective in which the desirable, the preferable and the beneficial assume the status of the necessary.
We urgently need a biblical theology of need. This is not to imply that in turning to Scripture we will there find our needs defined solely in terms of that which is necessary to survive. Indeed, the Bible is rich in references to God's lavish provision for his creation. Nevertheless, as we wrestle with honestly determining our needs, we must reckon with the truth that, like the broadband revolution, the biblical revelation will allow us no access to a narrow vision of our neighbour.
Nigel Hopper
Links
Read expert reaction to this week's digital Britain report here
Explore the debate about what the 50p levy will actually buy here
Check out Craig Bloomberg's book, Neither Poverty Nor Riches: A Biblical Theology of Possessions here
Comments
Nigel - I'm not sure you can see technology investment in Digital Britian the same as building a 3rd runway at Heathrow or the iPod. Digital Britain is an investment in SOCIETY that can transform not just Britain but the world. The Internet is not just about helping the rich get richer or about technology for technology's sake or about entertainment for the affluent. The Internet democratises and emancipates - look at what is happening in Iran - how would we know about what was happening and how would the opposition supporters be able to organise themselves if it wasn't for Internet enabled services like Twitter? I think it is a short-term argument to juxtapose helping the poor with the basics of life with investing in an infrastructure that releases tremendous potential to reduce carbon emissions, to improve quality of life by reversing the 250 year trend to the cities, to improve consumption efficiency so that we make better use of the world's resources, to provide free, un-intermediated access to information, to avoid the developing countries making the same mistakes as the developed ones. Of course, as best we can, we need to both help our neighbours now AND invest for the future but what we have to see is that the CORRECT engagement with the Digital Revolution offers us the opportunity to address social justice, climate change, health, world hunger and all those insoluble issues in a way that no other technological innovation can do. For me, it is a false dichotomy to say that those 50ps could 'better be used if they were given to the poor' which I feel can be inferred from what you have written. Indeed it is very dangerous to say so because we could use the money to achieve a short-term win for this generation whilst condemning the future of EVERYONE. The church, Christians, charities, aid agencies etc. that are all doing the work at the sharp end really need to wise up to what business and the new media generation of the world has already figured out...there is a revolution going on that is as big - if not bigger - than the Industrial Revolution, it has the potential to drive GOOD - or ill - depending on how we ENGAGE with it...so far our lack of engagement has managed to allow the internet to be dominated by pornographers, entertainers and advertisers...but it can be such a powerful force for good if only we bothered to take the time to understand the medium. For me, it is yours that is the narrow vision, a Digital Britian where the vision has been engaged with wholeheartedly by God's people can transform the world. Sticking the 50ps in the poor box the same way as has always been done by charities and aid agencies forever and a day does not offer the same possibilities and in fact could do worse, it could leave an economically crippled Britain unable to help ANY neighbours and the potential of the Digital Revolution open to be harnessed for ill rather than for good. I believe it is our Christian duty to get stuck into this revolution, it is about SOCIETY and COMMUNITY not about technology and I don't feel the church gets that, the Digital Revolution is exactly where we should be seeking to position church and mission...it links the body in a way that offers us so much more possibilities than the little ol' parochial model that we persist in using as the mainstay of our engagement with the world. My summary is that we must 'get with the programme!', God has provided us with a fabulously powerful tool to transform the world and we run the danger of turning our noses up at it because we didn't think of it first and sticking to less effective and more wasteful ways of serving our neighbours and executing our mission. Beware Digital Luddites who think this is about technology. Tim Mercer Thomson Reuters
Tim, thanks so much for taking the time to craft such a detailed response. I'm not sure that I disagree with any of your points, and would concur that our challenge is how to best help our neighbours now AND invest for the future. Nigel
Date:
2009-06-19 20:52:42
Author:
Nigel Hopper