Nick C: Samantha's point is a good one. The Census data, it should be noted,
describe the digital divide as closing, not closed. But lurking behind
Smantha's point is the larger issue: the difference between access and
literacy, between access and quality access.

It's one thing to have a computer in your home, a machine where you can set
and adjust defaults, turn on whenever it's convenient, poke and prod, get
under the hood of if you've a mind too. It's easier to become literate--and
critical--if your access gives you time to play, experiment, and learn more
deeply the programs and interfaces you use.

Now kids who might see a computer for a few hours a week, if that much,
might be said to 'have access,' but it's a different kind of access and
they'll develop different literacy habits. Much will depend upon the school
they're in, the teachers they have and how they think to present and suggest
the machines are used, the location of libraries and community centers where
they might get online when school's out or they're out of school, the kinds
of computer work they do in what jobs they get, and so on.

Like other things for poorer school districts--more rundown physical plants,
more out of date and missing and abused books, higher teacher turn overs,
neighborhoods that can be more dangerous to pass through on the way to
school (if they're urban; rura