Post on 23-Feb-2023
1
VRIJE UNIVERSITEIT BRUSSELS
VUB
Advanced Methods of Theoretical Debates
Is Turkey an Equitable Information Society?
Essay
Senem Guneser
06 January 2014
2
Is Turkey an Equitable Information Society?
Abstract
This paper will study how far Turkey has come to be an equitable information society. In
Turkey being a multicultural and multilingual country, differences have always been present
between the regions which has serious political and societal consequences. Kurdish and the
gender issues are one of the most important issues on the top of the agenda in the country.
For this reason, in this paper I will analyse data on the ICT usage in urban and rural areas as
well as in different regions of Turkey and see how far Turkey has come to be an equitable
information society. It is important to provide the opportunities of the ICT to the different
parts of the society in a way that all citizens are able to use the ICT`s effectively in their daily
life in order to eliminate the differences or minimize them.
In order to do this, it is important to ask how much ICT there is in this society and and how
far does this take us towards qualifying for information society status. What is information
society? And why is it so important to become an information society? How and does being
an information society overcome the inequalites and exclusions in the society?
Introduction
This paper is arranged in three parts. The first part comprises of an introduction where the
concept of an equitable information society is discussed. In the second part, a theoretical
approach where the theories of Manuel Castells and Frank Webster from the view of
equalities and exclusion are discussed. Then in the third part, I will study the data of Turkish
Statistical Institute (TUIK), interpret and analyse it. Lastly, in the fourth section I will draw
some conclusions from my analyis of the given data.
Theoretical Approach
Although there are many interrogative and sceptical views as to what information society is
among scholars, none would disagree with this concept of information society is that it is a
3
society where the use, creation and distribution, integration and manipulation of information
is an economic, political and cultural activity.1
Information technology goes beyond computers and internet, and there are discussions about
how big the influence of specific media or specific modes of production really is.
The issue of ICT`s and their role in the new society have been tackled by many scholars
using different concepts. In this part however, I will discuss theories of Manuel Castells and
Frank Webster from the view of inequality and exclusion. First I will have a look at how both
thinkers define information society.
Information Society
Manuel Castells is one of the thinkers that used the concept of the network society. For
Castells, “Network society is a society whose social structure is made of networks powered
by microelectronics-based information and communication technologies.” (Castells, 2004,
p.1)
For Castells, getting a computer doesn`t change the world but how you use it actually
important is. You can use internet to exclude, you can exclude access to internet. It is a digital
device but it has the ability to process all the information, let it be cultural or educational.
This is what the elites of the world do, says Castells. Ngo`s, environment movements, and
other organizations organize themselves on the internet and use information technologies and
information systems to actually introduce counter trends to one logic of pure enstrumentality.
If we include no change, the same model of production and consumption that we have today the
50/60 % of the human kind is excluded. What Castells argues is that the information is not new,
but what is new is that the “action of knowledge upon knowledge itself” (Castells, 2000b, p.
17) is now the basis to increased productivity. He believes that with this level and model of
construction we destroy our planet and we can only survive on the basis of extreme
inequality. For Castells, (1990, p. 21) for communal identity to be a site of democratic
resistance communities must reach out and build network with other communities of other
cultures.
1 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_society; accessed on 01/01/2014
4
Frank Webster, a well known critique of notion of information society introduces five
definitions of information society which presents criteria for identifying what the new about
society is. 1)technological, 2)economic, 3) occupational, 4) spatial, 5)cultural. These five
definitions all share, `the conviction that quantitative changes in information are bringing into
being a qualitatively new sort of social system, the information society. Each definition have
one in common: we have more information in today`s world so we live in an information
society.Where as the sixth (6) definition is not that there is more information today, but rather
the character of information is such as to have transformed how we live. (Webster, 2006, p9)
What Webster has commom with Castells` view is that the importance of information, and
the growing gap between those who can and who can`t access knowledge.
Unlike Castells, Webster rejects that the comtemparary era is a completely new era but rather
it is the continuation od the industrial age. Webster (2006) sees Castells more of a
technological determinist. According to Webster the mode of development influences social
relations, but is not determined by capitalism. 2 For Castells, the society is still capitalist
however information is the important feature in the society. This information has the central
importance in determining economic productivity. Castells claims that networks become a
“key feature of social morphology” (2000a, p. 5).
On the other hand Webster claims, “The pursuit of a quantitative measure of information
work disguises the possibility that the growth of certain types of information occupation may
have particularly important consequences for social life.”
According to Castells, power now rests in network society: “Power is redefined, but it does
not vanish. Nor the social struggles. Domination and resistance to domination change
according to the specific social structure from which they originate and which they modify by
their action.”(Castells, 2004, p. 36). So there is power that rules but there is also a counter-
powers struggle. Webster`s view on this is critical: “the logic of the network is more
powerful than the powers of the network” (Webster, 2002, p. 104).
2 http://www.geof.net/research/2005/castells-network-society accessed on 02/01/2014
5
This new environment requires skilled flexible workers: the organization man gives way to
the flexible woman (Castells, 2000a, p. 12). This leads to a binary process of inclusion and
exclusion from the network. The people at the bottom are those who, with nothing to offer the
network, are excluded.
Castells says we live in a post-capitalist era with the feauture of informational mode of
development. However he stresses the ruling class no longer in control, it is networks that are
in power. For Webster , the capitalists remain in control. The ruling class has better access to
education, and dominant in the top managerial positions.3
In terms of culture of network society, “the network society develops in a multiplicity of
cultural settings, produced by the differential history of each context.” (Castells, 2000, p.38)
For Castells, specific cultural identities, individuals, collectives who refuse to fade away in
the logic of the dominant networks : “To be French becomes, again as relevant as to be a
citizen. To be Catalan, or Irish, or Basque, or Quebecois, or Kurd, or Tibetan, or Aymara
becomes a rallying point of self identification vis-a vis the domination of imposed nation-
states. “ (Castells, 2004, p.39)
In summary, Webster finds Castells technically determined and sees the contemparary society
as a continuity of the industrial era and not a completely new one. For Webster, it`s a
sytemic change: whether it is in the form of Bell`s `Post Industrialism`, Castells,
`Informational mode of development`. Furthermore Webster believes, “Information comes to
be a purely quantative measure of communicative exchanges”. (2006, p. 23). Webster claims
that there are social and economic consequences of the information society. According to
him, work will be transformed, education upturned, corparate structures revitalised,
democracy itself reassessed. (Webster, 2006, p. 5). Frank Webster argues that globalization
is accompanied by rising inequality and insecurity in the world. Castells argues that we
moved from industrial society to informational society- a network society where the society
is structured around the networks. Castells underlines the interrelationship of social,
economic and political factors of society and identifies the `network` as the key feature of
todays` epoch.
`Everybody must have access to a more equitable information society`, but the question is
how can you quarantee the right to information for all countries, for all regions and genders
alike? During the summit of World of Parliaments-International Organization for
Parliaments(IPU) in 2013 in Geneva parlamentarians from all around the world agreed to
move towards a more equitable information society yet they expressed some concerns how to
3 See http://www.geof.net/research/2005/castells-network-society accessed on 29/12/2013
6
guarantee the right to information. 4 Some of the concerns that the representatives of the
citizens expressed were and still the issue are :
The difference between the people-the wealthy is equipped and have access to
internet. The poor cannot buy computers and get nothing from this information
society
A large part of the population is denied the information which others have. How can
we build an information society if they are marginalized?
When more information is publicly accessible to lobbies, interest groups and citizens-
how do you educate with all the materials on line ?
As we can see in today`s world creating an equitable information society where ICT`s are
widely used; infromation services are widely available for everybody, all genders and every
nation can fully benefit from it. This has been the goal of many policies in almost all
countries around the world.
Data and Interpretation
In this section I will have a look at the data provided by Turkish Statistical Institute (TUIK),
Information And Communication Technology (ict) Usage Survey On Households And
Individuals- 2013 reseach . (The result of the research is published with a press release TUIK
No: 13569 on 22 August 2013).5
With this survey, I will have a look the data on following topics:
- ICT technologies in households
- Computer and Internet usage by individuals and male and female
-Internet (Households with Internet access, connection types, connected devices, Internet
usage and frequency by individuals and by female and male)
-Computer and internet usage in the regions
4 For more information see, http://www.ipu.org/news-e/13-3.htm accesed on 01/01/2014
5 According to TUIK, for the system of data collection, questionnaires are prepared based on model
questionnaire which prepared and recommended by EUROSTAT. Model questionnaires are adapted
to the conditions in Turkey and also regulated in accordance with national institutions’ needs.
7
Concepts used in this survey:
Households: One person or group of persons with or without a family relationship who live in
the same house or in the same part of the house, who share their meals, earnings and
expenditures and who take part in the management of the household and who render services
to the household.
Urban: Settlements with a population of 20 001 and over.
Rural: Settlements with a population of 20 000 or less.
According to the TUIK scope of the Datais that all private households who are living in the
territory of Republic of Turkey are covered individuals, male and female aged 16-74 and
children aged 06-15 are covered.
Geographically, all settlements in Turkey have been covered in sample selection.
For data collection method, computer aided personel interview is used
Analysis
In Turkey, individuals aged 16-74 used once or more computer and Internet were % 49.9 and
% 48.9, respectively.(see Table1)
Those never used computers and Internet were %50.1 and %51.1. This was %41.0 and %42.0
in urban areas respectively and %70.5 and %71.4 in rural areas.(see Table1)
Males used more computer and Internet than females. Usage of computer and Internet by
males were %60.2 and %59.3 respectively, whereas female usage of one these technologies
were %39.8 and % 38.7 respectively. (see Table1)
When we look at the proportion of computer and Internet use in urban and rural areas: %59
and %58 in urban areas, and %29.5 and % 28.6 in rural areas. (see Table1)
8
The percentage of computer and Internet use in different regions in Turkey showed great
differences. The highest proportion was in TR1 İstanbul with % 62.1 and % 61.4. This region
was followed by TR5 (Ankara, Konya Karaman) with %59.8 and %58.5 respectively. The
lowest was in TRB (Malatya, Elazig, Bingol, Dersim, Van, Mus, Bitlis, Hakkari) where
computer and Internet use were %31.8 and %31.0 respectively. (see Table2)
The highest proportions of female computer and Internet usage in the regions were TR1
Istanbul; %53.7 and %52.8 whereas male usage were almost the double of female usage of
the ICT`s; %70.0 and %69.5. TRB (Malatya, Elazig, Bingol, Dersim, Van, Mus, Bitlis,
Hakkari) region was the lowest in terms of female usage of ICT`s. Only %19.5 female used
computer and only %18.8 used internet whereas the proportion of male users of the ICT`s
were much higher: %45.0 and %44.1. (see Table2)
According to the results of TUIK ICT Usage Survey in Households and Individuals carried
out in April, 2013, 49.1 per cent of households have access to the Internet at home. It was
%47.2 in April, 2012. (see Table4)
Percentage of households with access to the Internet was %57.4 in urban areas and %29.1 in
rural areas. According to SR Level1, percentages of households with access to the Internet in
TR1 İstanbul (%63.3), TR2 (Istanbul, Tekirdag, Edirne, Kirklareli, Balikkesir, Canakkale)
(%58.8), TR4 (Bursa, Eskisehir, Bilecik, Kocaeli, Sakarya, Duzce, Bolu, Yalova) (%56.8),
TR5 (Ankara, Konya, Karaman) (%52.4) were above the average of Turkey. (see Table4)
In January-March of 2013, %39.5 of all individuals aged 16-74 used the Internet almost every
day or at least once a week (regularly Internet use). Proportion of regular Internet users were
%92.6 in urban area, %86.7 in rural area and %96.1 in TR1 İstanbul by SR Level1(according
to the statistical regions(SR) table6 SR Level1 is the western part of the country). (see
Table13)
In April, 2013, %46.5 of households had broadband connection. ADSL was used to access
the Internet %32.2 of all households and %65.6 of households with Internet access. 3G were
6 For more information see the Statistical Regions(SR) table on
http://www.tuik.gov.tr/MicroVeri/GYKA_2011/english/images/explanation_method_2011.jpg accessed on 01/01/2014
9
used to access the Internet %20.1 of all households and %41 of households with Internet
access.(see Table7)
Conclusion
The question of whether a country is an equitable information society or not, does not provide
us with a straightforward answer. Looking at the country statistics in Turkey above in the
light of the Castells theory on network society, knowledge of technology, information, and
access to networks are highly significant and the uneven development in technology leads to
'social polarization and social exclusion'. In terms of an equitable information society,
statistics shows us that there is a great gap between the urban(west) and the rural(east) of the
country, where the majority of its inhabitants are Kurdish. Therefore Kurds living in east and
south eastern regions (many also live in the urban(west and is not in the scope of our
research)) of the country do not have equal access to ICT`s and thus excluded from
opportunities provided by the ICT`s. The same conclusion can be made for females. In terms
of female ICT`s usage there is more inequality in the rural. In the rural areas(east and south
east regions of Turkey) less women compare to men take advantage of the ICT`s. To wrap up
we can say that a large part of the population is denied the information which others have in
Turkey. The question is that how can you build an information society if they are
marginalized?
References
Webster, F. (2006) Theories of the Information Society (3th edition), Sage Publications,
Chapter 1 & 2, pp. 1-31.
Webster, F. (2006) Theories of the Information Society (3th edition), Sage Publications,
Chapter 3. Post-Industrial Society: Daniel Bell, pp. 32-59.
Perez, C. (2009) Technological Revolutions and Techno-Economic Paradigms. TOC/TUT
Working Paper, 20. Online at www.carlotaperez.org
Duff, A. (2000) Information Society Studies. Routledge. Chapter 2. Information Sector
Version of the Information Society Thesis, pp.19-71.
10
Castells, M. (2004) Informationalism. Networks, and the Network Society: A Theoretical
Blueprint. In: Castells, M. (ed.) The Network Society. A cross-cultural perspective.
Cheltanham: Edward Elgar, pp. 3-48.
Hassan, R. (2008) The information Society. Polity. Chapter 6. Faster and Faster, pp. 159-189.
Tomlinson, J. (2007) The Culture of Speed. The Coming of Immediacy. Sage Publications.
Chapters 3-5, pp. 44-123.
Castells, M. (2009) Communication Power. Oxford University Press. Chapter 2.
Communication in the Digital Age, pp. 54-136.
Turkish Statistical Institute-TUIK http://www.turkstat.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=13569
accessed on 01/01/2014
International Organization of Parliaments http://www.ipu.org/news-e/13-3.htm accessed on
01/01/2014
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_society; accessed on 01/01/2014
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Information_Age:_Economy,_Society_and_Culture accessed on
01/01/2014
Manuel Castells` Network Society http://www.geof.net/research/2005/castells-network-
society accessed on 30/12/2013