Web refuseniks batten down the hatches

THE WIBBLY WOBBLY WEB is great. I love it. As a hack that started scribbling back when a new typewriter in the office was reason enough for colleagues to gather around and emit appreciative 'oohs' and 'aahhs', I've been lucky enough to witness first hand how PCs, the Net - and technology in general - have revolutionised the workplace. That said, with Web access all day at work, I was slow to get it in my home.

There was little need. As a full time hack, I worked mainly in an office, sating any of my Internet urges (ahem, I mean 'work-related research') on the company dime. By the time I got home, I was webbed out and only used PCs in the evening for 4-hour sessions of Doom or Warcraft (yes, the original one on 3.5in disks). Sad, but true. Even as a so-called early adopter of technology, I saw little need to have Net access at home. Although, I had good reasons.

The only way to do it was via modems - and not the 56K ones either. Connecting took longer than a depressing Will Self sentence and 'surfing' was just not a word you could truthfully use to describe the Net experience. Surfing implies a sense of dramatic speed and excitement. This was more like synchronised drowning. Now, with broadband access the Net experience is finally catching up with its terminology. It's not perfect but, anyone that started their Net life with a series of modems and dial-up services, strokes their broadband router lovingly every morning and rarely complains.

It comes as no surprise to me then that the digital divide is increasing, not shrinking. Despite the increasing rollout of broadband availability, there are a significant number of people not using it. It's not because they are poor - although for a certain segment that is a factor - it's because they are not all that interested. In a report called Broadband Access Survey 2 from Point Topic, it states that the number of non-access UK households that don't believe Net access at home is important has risen sharply from 51.7% in mid-2005 to 74.6% in early 2006. Early this year, 11.2m households had no Net access at home - that's 44%. Alarmingly, or so it's claimed, even though more households are taking up broadband, the ones that are not are increasingly resistant to the Net's wily charms.

Are we talking about old codgers taking potshots at BT engineers through the letterbox? No, although it should be filed away as a possible method to get them to work faster. What it shows is that the Internet is not something that almost half of the country are that interested in experiencing. It's hard to believe that half the country don't want to see Jordan's inflated mammaries - again - or David Cameron's embarrassing dishwashing video blog, but there you have it.

The reasons are threefold, said the survey: lack of need or interest, cost or other material constraints and lack of the necessary skills. OK, it's about now that Web converts are saying: "See, it's because they can't afford it or are not tech savvy." However, the survey asked if cost and tech skills were not an issue, would they allow the Net in their home? Only 16% said yes while almost 43% declined to answer. Presumably, a another large chunk said "No".

Am I surprised? Not at all. Apart from the monetary considerations and basic computer skills required, the Internet doesn't exactly have the greatest public image. After all, how many positive Internet stories did you see in the national press or TV news this week? Or this month? Tot them up on one side of the page, if you can, and then on the other list the Internet-related horror stories. Porn, hackers, viruses, Spam, online paedophiles, seedy chat groups, "My daughter ran off with a 52-year old coalman she met on the Net" etc. etc. etc. If I was a bit older, a lot less tech-crazed or had young teens, these messages would not exactly have me whipping out my flexible friend and signing up for broadband. It's a fact. General disinterest in the Net, combined with a deluge of negative media coverage, are disincentives.

The researchers claimed that such a mindset "could prove a high barrier to achieving much higher levels of Internet access." This is possibly true in the very short term but it's hardly anything to worry about. Broadband is arriving in so many forms now - from mobile phone suppliers to TV companies offering it along with the channels - that Net access will be available to most people by default in a few years. Whether they use it, of course, will be up to them. For instance, I have relatively young in-laws who have had access to the Net for 18-months but who have only ventured online twice: Man Utd's homepage both times - go figure. They have other interests and despite the massive resource of the Web, it was never part of their working life and it won't make up part of their retirement.

I don't think the Net is for everyone. I don't think anyone should panic about it either. All those worried about broadband rollout and take-up levels should take a deep breath. The Internet at home, like TVs, is inevitable. Not everyone though has to be excited or happy about it. µ