technoculture314-09

Winston's article (2007) claims that, for Negroponte, the introduction of two million laptops will overcome war, poverty, inequality etc. in the South because those who this technology will be educated enough to avoid these perils" (Winston, 2007: p.171). I agree with Winston (2007) when he claims that technology is a powerful social force. We, as media students, know for a fact that it is. However, to assume that the effects of new technology can stretch out to every factor of the social world can not be good (or at least not so in my opinion, as well as Winstons for that matter). I don't believe that giving a laptop to two million children in Africa can fix the nations problems. Sure, it might help some children to learn more, and even get them better jobs and help contribute to the development of the region. However, what Negroponte seems to lack is an understanding of the basic infrastructure within the society. For example, though these laptops might provide better education for children, it isn't going to 'magically' change the fact that many of these children are malnourished, and need more food to survive. Furthermore, although this 'education' might make them better equipped for the workforce, is there really any kind of stable work force for people to move in to in such countries? Is it going to fix poverty itself? Hardly. Many scholars argue that third world nations have been thrown into a state of poverty as a result of capitalism, and reliance on capitalist, Western countries (though that is another matter entirely). Other scholars argue that poverty has also occurred due to the effects of climate change. Can the introduction of $100 laptops change a countries climate problems? I think not. Though technology does have an impact on society, we can't fix all of a countries problems just by throwing a bit of technology their way and assume that this technology can have the same importance as in the West.