A little over a year ago, Smart Rural Community (SRC) published a report addressing Rural Imperatives in Broadband Adoption and Digital Inclusion (that was, in fact, the title of the report – hence the title-case lettering there). The report relied chiefly on data produced by Pew Research and other organizations, including industry, academic, and governmental sources. The paper focused on home and “all broadband” adoption (the latter including mobile devices) and examined four demographic categories bounded by age, household income, educational attainment, and race. The good news: Adoption is growing in all categories, and gaps between different segments of the individual categories are narrowing. The bad news: Affordability remains the largest barrier to adoption. Household income and educational attainment (the latter is linked to earning potential) remain categories in which the broadest gaps exist. Nevertheless, I was bullish on the narrowing adoption rates in age-related categories. I read the narrowing gaps among users of different ages (18-29, 30-49, 50-64, and 65+) as predictive and concluded in the report that usage rates among seniors and young people will eventually be roughly equal. The optimist in me predicted that I won’t give up my broadband when my AARP membership comes due. But, as Paul Harvey might have said, there’s always “the rest of the story.”
Last week, McKinsey & Company released a report on Closing the Digital Divide in Black America. Echoing data presented in the SRC report, McKinsey notes the need to address affordability, stating, “the majority of Black households directly impacted by the digital divide live in areas with available infrastructure but simply can’t afford broadband service.” This finding underscores the need for federal programs such as the Universal Service Fund, which supports (pursuant to Congressional directives articulated in the Communications Act) not only the deployment in rural areas of broadband that as “reasonably comparable” to that which is available in urban areas, but also that those services be available at “reasonably comparable” rates. And where the general constructs do not extend far enough, there are programs that offer additional support to low-income users, including Lifeline and the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP).
The SRC report mentioned above addresses many of the use cases for broadband, particularly rural broadband. These include applications to support economic development, education, and healthcare. And, even while expressing optimism over U.S. adoption and usage trends, NTCA followed the report with the creation of a digital inclusion toolkit aimed at helping rural broadband providers develop and deliver even greater digital inclusion initiatives. The McKinsey report provides yet another perspective on strategies to avoid the hazards (and opportunity costs) of low adoption and usage rates.
Now, back to aging. The trends do not suggest that there will be large-scale broadband disconnections as people round the bend toward the proverbial 16th hole. But, and borrowing from both my recent experiences at CES as well as insight offered by the McKinsey team, neither does that mean that digital literacy efforts for seniors should wind down over the next 20 years. To the contrary, there is an imperative for communities (however those communities are defined, whether by place or cultural affiliation) to evolve their elder-oriented digital literacy efforts over time.
As the McKinsey experts observed, technology is dynamic, and its applications evolve and expand over time. So, the mastery of the tablet and online banking that a grandparent achieved several years ago might not be sufficient to navigate newly forming telemedicine resources – for example, the use of virtual reality for telehealth. Or to avoid ever emerging cyber and privacy threats.
And there are the positive aspects, as well. We often talk about broadband as enabling opportunities. Last week’s Daily Yonder provided a salient example: the use of online, remote fitness classes for rural seniors. And, as the article explains, the new classes are not COVID-driven substitutes but rather COVID-inspired offerings that did not enjoy widespread use before the pandemic. The Daily Yonder also reports that the National Council on Aging convenes monthly conference calls to explore virtual offerings for seniors.
To be sure, and as we have discussed previously, virtual interactions are not a substitute for in-person interactions. But positive impacts of virtual interactions to relieve senior loneliness and isolation have been identified. (“Loneliness” refers to the subject’s experience of unfulfilled social and intimate needs. By contrast, “isolation” is a lack of social connections. A person can be isolated, yet not feel lonely, while a person with social contacts can yet feel lonely.) The sum of it that as applications evolve, the need for education and literacy coaching will continue as we age. I’m still optimistic on adoption and usage rates for the elderly – just more broadly now.