This article reports on findings from an ethnographic study of fifteen participant households in North Hobart and Midway Point, Tasmania. Key themes emerging from this research have been gathered and presented here through the metaphor ‘digital literacy’. The first half of the article is concerned with developing a critical understanding of what is at stake in the notion, or metaphor, of digital literacy. The second half tests these understandings against our research. In our conversations with the people of North Hobart and Midway Point, we found evidence of digital illiteracy, and also evidence of the weaknesses of digital literacy as an explanatory trope. We group these findings using three themes: (1) the presence of instrumental literacy; (2) the illegibility of the NBN and its HSB services; and (3) structural conditions limiting the acquisition of the NBN and its HSB services. These three draw upon the digital literacy metaphor, but make its shortcomings clear, and the latter two in particular extend the metaphor from a personal deficit model to one that embraces technologies and social structures.
ArnoldM.2004, ‘The Connected Homes Project: Probing the Effects and Affects of Domesticated ICTs’, Proceedings of the Eighth Biennial Participatory Design Conference, 27–31 July, Toronto.
ArnoldM.ShepherdC.GibbsM.MecolesK.2006, ‘Domestic Information and Communication Technologies and Subject–Object Relations: Gender, Identity and Family Life’, Journal of Family Studies, no. 12, pp. 95–112.
5.
Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA)2007, Media Literacy – Concepts, Research and Regulatory Issues, ACMA, Melbourne.
6.
Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), 2008, Developments in Internet Filtering Technologies and Other Measures for Promoting Online Safety: Second Annual Report to the Minister for Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy, ACMA, Melbourne.
7.
Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA), 2009, Digital Media Literacy in Australia Key Indicators and Research Sources, ACMA, Melbourne.
Department of Broadband, Communications and the Digital Economy (DBCDE)2011, Submission to the House Standing Committee on Infrastructure and Communications: The Role and Potential of the National Broadband Network, DBCDE, Canberra.
10.
EdwardsK.W.GrinterR.E.MahajanR.WetherallD.2011, ‘Advancing the State of Home Networking’, Communications of the ACM, vol. 54, no. 6, pp. 62–71.
EzellS.AtkinsonR.CastroD.OuG.2009, The Need for Speed: The Importance of Next-Generation Broadband Networks, Information Technology & Innovation Foundation, Washington, DC, www.itif.org/files/2009-needforspeed.pdf.
13.
FothM.ForlanoL.ScatchellC.GibbsM. (eds) 2011, From Social Butterfly to Engaged Citizen: Urban Informatics, Social Media, Ubiquitous Computing, and Mobile Technology to Support Citizen Engagement, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
14.
GaverW.BoucherA.PenningtonS.WalkerB., 2004, ‘Cultural Probes and the Value of Uncertainty’, Interactions, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 53–56.
15.
GaverW.DunneA.PacentiE.1999, ‘Design: Cultural Probes’, Interactions, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 21–29.
16.
GivenJ.2010, ‘The Most Connected Place on the Planet’, Communication, Politics & Culture, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 120–42.
17.
HearnG.FothM.2007, ‘Communicative Ecologies: Editorial Preface’, Electronic Journal of Communication, vol. 17, nos 1–2, http://eprints.qut.edu.au/8171.
GursteinM.2004, ‘Effective Use and the Community Informatics Sector: Some Thoughts on Canada's Approach to Community Technology/Community Access’, in MollM.ShadeL. (eds), Seeking Convergence in Policy and Practice: Communications in the Public Interest, Vol. 2, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, Ottawa, pp. 223–43.
20.
HobbsR.2008, ‘Debates and Challenges Facing New Literacies in the 21st Century’, in DrotnerK.LivingstoneS. (eds), International Handbook of Children, Media and Culture, Sage, London, pp. 431–47.
21.
JenkinsH.2006, Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide, New York University Press, New York.
22.
JenkinsH. (with PurushotmaR.ClintonK.WeigelM.RobisonA.J.) 2009, Confronting the Challenges of Participatory Culture: Media Education for the 21st Century, MacArthur Foundation, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
23.
LivingstoneS.2009, Children and the Internet: Great Expectations, Challenging Realities, Polity Press, Cambridge.
24.
LukeC.2000, ‘Cyberschooling and Technological Change: Multiliteracies for New Times’, in KalantzisM.CopeB. (eds), Multiliteracies: Literacy, Learning and the Design of Social Futures, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 69–91.
25.
LukeC.2001, ‘New Times, New Media: Where to Media Education?’, Media International Australia, no. 101, pp. 87–100.
26.
MaherA.2008, Digital Inclusion Initiative, Infoxchange, Melbourne.
27.
RogersE.M.1983, Diffusion of Innovations, 3rd edn, The Free Press, New York.
SatchellC.DourishP.2009, ‘Beyond the User: Use and Non-use in HCI’, in Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference of the Australian Computer-Human Interaction Special Interest Group (OZCHI ‘09), ACM, New York, pp. 9–16.
30.
SelwynN.2003, ‘Apart from Technology: Understanding People's Non-Use of Information and Communication Technologies in Everyday Life’, Technology in Society, no. 25, pp. 99–116.
31.
ShepherdC.ArnoldM.BellamyC.GibbsM.2007, ‘The Material Ecologies of Domestic ICTs’, The Electronic Journal of Communication, vol. 17, nos 1–2, www.cios.org/www/ejc/v17n12.htm.
32.
SpigelL.2001, ‘Media Homes: Then and Now’, International Journal of Cultural Studies, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 385–411.
33.
SpringJ.WiatrR.2006, ‘The TasCOLT Project’, Telecommunication Journal of Australia, vol. 56, nos 3/4, pp. 37–48.
34.
TacchiJ.2006, ‘Studying Communicative Ecologies: An Ethnographic Approach to Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs)’, in Proceedings of the 56th Annual Conference of the International Communication Association, Dresden.
VenkateshA.2008, ‘Digital Home Technologies and Transformation of Households’, Information Systems Frontiers, no. 10, pp. 391–95.
37.
VerbeekP.2005, What Things Do: Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design, Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park, PA.
38.
WarschauerM.2003, Technology and Social Inclusion: Rethinking the Digital Divide, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
39.
WilkenR.NansenB.ArnoldM.2011, ‘Broadband in the Home Pilot Study: Suburban Hobart’, Telecommunications Journal of Australia, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 5.1–5.16.
