By Marlissa Collier
A few years ago, the world became temporarily obsessed with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. The psychology theory was proposed by Abraham Maslow, a thought leader who, during a time when most psychologists were obsessed with studying the mentally ill, sought to understand the ingredients of good mental health. In his 1943 paper “A Theory of Human Motivation,” Maslow laid out what he believed were basic humanistic needs that, according to Maslow, should be acknowledged before seeking “higher needs.”
The theory, often depicted by a pyramid with five tiers, suggests that as the basic needs at the lower levels are met, individuals are then motivated to fulfill the needs at the higher levels. Traditionally, Maslow’s pyramid identified basic physiological needs (food, water, shelter) at the foundation, followed by safety and security needs, social needs (love, belonging), esteem needs (achievement, recognition), and finally, self-actualization (fulfilling one’s potential).
Internet Access As A New Basic Human Need?
Eighty years later, Maslow’s theory remains a valuable framework for understanding human motivation, highlighting the importance of fulfilling basic needs before focusing on higher-level aspirations. The problem with applying Maslow’s theory 80 years later is that it’s, well, 80 years later, and as the world has changed, so have the basic needs of humans.
In those 80 years, the once analog world has transformed into a digital one. In 1948, just five years after the publishing of Maslow’s theory, Claude Shannon’s theory of information in 1948 would provide the mathematical framework for digital communication. Between the 1940s and 1980s, the invention of the transistor and the microchip revolutionized computing, enabling the development of digital computers. Then, with the invention of the personal computer in the 70s and the adoption of the internet in the 90s, information and communication became accessible to more people than ever before. By the early 2000s, the world found itself in the age of connectivity.
Eighty years later, on average people spend close to seven hours, or a quarter of their daily waking hours online. Today, it seems that Maslow’s hierarchy of needs and the internet present an interesting interplay as connectivity is a tool that can (and sometimes, must) be used to address various needs. The internet, once a novelty, has become an essential utility. From education and employment to healthcare and civic engagement, reliable internet access is now a cornerstone of participation in modern society. Yet, a significant portion of the population remains on the wrong side of the digital divide.
The Reveal
For years, the depth of the digital divide seemed to take a back seat to other issues plaguing American society. As politicians campaigned and developed legislation around housing, education, jobs, immigration, abortion and other hot-button issues, the divide remained, rarely properly tended to. Then, in 2020, came the pandemic’s double-edged sword — and soon, COVID-19 would expose and exacerbate the divide.
The pandemic fundamentally altered the way we live, work, and learn. While technology played a crucial role in keeping us connected during lockdowns, it also laid bare a preexisting and ignored connectivity disparity. In Dallas, the proud home of a booming business community and growing tech scene, this gap became a chasm during the pandemic, highlighting the unequal playing field created by limited internet access.
The shift to remote learning left countless inner-city students without internet access at a significant disadvantage. Unable to participate in online classes, access educational resources, or collaborate with peers virtually, the lack of access only exacerbated existing educational inequalities, widening the achievement gap. Carvell Dangerfield, a veteran teacher at The Great James Madison High School in South Dallas says he saw the impact the divide had on his students firsthand. “A large number of the students did not have access to the internet prior to the pandemic. If it wasn’t for the district’s quick response and providing internet service via hotspots and 3rd party in-home connections, remote learning would have been much less effective.”
Seventeen-year-old Christian “Batman” Williams, president of West Dallas’s Pinkston High School’s podcast club and an emerging journalist in his own right, says that disruptions to the internet service at home made concentrating a challenge during quarantine. “When we did those online classes, I couldn’t stay focused for long because my internet would go out or it wouldn’t seem to be working, just a whole number of things. Focus was one of the issues, the connection was one of the issues, and then the billing.”
In 2021, Dallas Independent School District (DISD) attempted to remedy the divide for students like Batman, investing $4.5 million in a pilot program, rolled out to four schools, that meant a private wireless network. Four years and 40,000 hot spots later, Dallas Independent School District officials say that approximately 17% of students still lack broadband access at home.
The Cause
While various factors contribute to the connectivity gap, the way connectivity companies make investment decisions has played a significant role in the history of the digital divide. As businesses strive to maximize shareholder value by almost any means necessary, often tying executive compensation to stock performance, business decisions can leave the most vulnerable populations left out. In many cases, when the cost of servicing said populations is considered too high compared to the expected return, these populations go under or unserved.
As such, many internet service providers (ISPs) prioritize maximizing profits over expanding access. This can lead to limited investment in infrastructure expansion, particularly in rural or low-income areas. This practice has become known as digital redlining. Similar to redlining in the housing market, some ISPs may strategically avoid offering services in low-income neighborhoods, deeming them less profitable. This creates “internet deserts” where residents have little to no access, further marginalizing these communities.
In these areas, limited investment across connectivity companies means limited competition. Here, when ISPs decide to move in, they can charge exorbitant fees for internet service, creating a situation where even with infrastructure available, the cost becomes a barrier to entry. Carvell Dangerfield spoke of how the lack of competition impacts him and his students. “I have AT&T and due to the exclusivity of my apartments, they are the only providers allowed. Service is built into each unit.” Carvell says that he pays $80 per month for AT&T Fiber with 1 GIG speed — enough for him to game, stream, work and connect all of his devices.
Though for Batman, things are a little different. His household relies on a 5G signal, rather than a wired connection, to cover their entire home. 5G uses radio frequencies, and while the signal can be decent when close to the router, the signal tends to deteriorate the further it has to travel. “My mom has Metro by T-Mobile internet, where she can control it from her phone. I wish I could switch it because I don’t like it. At the same time, it’s hard for us to figure out how to pay the bill.”
Today, the Federal Communications Commission estimates that 42 million Americans live without broadband. The consequences of the digital divide have proven to be severe, especially as the country finds itself in the center of an education and literacy crisis. Students who lack internet access at home not only fall behind in online learning environments, deepening educational inequalities, but also fall behind on the technology literacy curve. Carvell Dangerfield says he’s also noticed the impact of lagging accessibility has on digital literacy. “I think they do fall behind due to [not] knowing.”
The Cure
Combating the digital divide has been met with a multi-faceted approach — a combination of government subsidies and business incentives. In November 2021, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act provided $14.2 billion to expand the Emergency Broadband Benefit Program to a longer-term Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP). This program provided a monthly subsidy of $30 to low-income households and up to $75 to tribal-land households to pay for internet service.
According to a recent report released by the FCC, of the 23 million households who enrolled in the program, two-thirds had inconsistent or zero connectivity prior to enrollment, while 80% cited affordability as the reason for the inconsistent or zero connectivity. Now, set to end on May 31, 2024, millions of Americans who relied on ACP subsidies may no longer be able to afford internet service, with 1.7 million Texans slated to be impacted.
But, a two-pronged solution, where federal dollars incentivize ISPs to invest in infrastructure expansion and prioritize universal access, can create a more equitable digital landscape. Strategies have already been implemented across several states, including California, Indiana, Vermont and Maine. Regarded as “last mile funding,” states either foot the bill or share in the cost alongside ISPs of connecting homes. In California, the state provides funding for a line extension to bring broadband to homes in underinvested areas, while in Maine, the government and ISPs share in the cost of bringing disconnected homes online.
The digital divide in America is a complex issue with no easy solutions, but it’s clear that action is needed to ensure everyone has access to this vital resource. Whether it’s through renewed government support, innovative solutions from the private sector, or a combination of both, ensuring affordable internet access for all remains a critical step toward a more equitable and connected society.
Disclaimer: This story is part of the Digital Equity Local Voices Fellowship lab. The lab initiative is made possible with support from Comcast NBCUniversal.