Abstract
This essay will try to argue and probably give an answer to the question why my country is not an information society, despite the difficulty that is hiding underneath the vagueness of the general Information’s society definition. If it is considered to be a new form of society we live in, then there is possible a global need of every country to adapt to the new challenge, walk along with its progress, invest, innovate and finally proceed this new type of living, which will likely be based on the use of Information Communication Technologies (ICT) and e-services. Studying the case of Greece, a small sized country in the European map with a controversial economy and a real GDP growth rate of -7,1% in 2011 (Eurostat, 2011), it could be argued that by default is not listed among the top countries regarding the evolution of Information Society. The reasons that Greece is not an Information society could be found by investigating the case from two perspectives. First in a macro level, by focusing on Greece as a member state of the EU, and second, in a micro level focused on the country itself with all its special characteristics that define its economic, political, social and cultural sphere. By having a closer look on various statistics and facts there will be an attempt to describe today’s reality and then justify why Greece rests still behind towards the emergence of the Information society.
Introduction
1. Defining Information society
In reality trying to define “Information Society” seems so hard as when somebody is trying to define separately what “society” or “information” is. In my mind if Information society had a shape, it could include various concepts such as: Post-Industrial society, information revolution, microelectronics revolution, capitalism, Information and Communication Technology (ICT), innovation, knowledge, networks and even surveillance. Each of those notions could transform the shape of this society accordingly, raising up questions, developing theories and trying to give answers. In the field of the academia there has been a great discourse not only around the definition as such but also about the coming of a new society. For instance, Frank Webster (2006) tries to distinguish the concept of information society by using five different definitions: technological, economic, occupational, spatial , cultural and a sixth the theoretical knowledge. He talks about definitions that focused on quantitative changes which led us to an Information society today and to a definition based on the character-quality of information which transformed our lives. (Webster, 2006: 8-9)
Alternatively, for Manuel Castells this society is not an Information society but a network society based on microelectronics. (Castells, 2004:1). Daniel Bell on the other hand, states that we entering a new system, a post-industrial society, where there is not just more information but also a different kind of information /knowledge in play (Websters, 2006:35). However, according to Webster (2006:2) whatever the differences are, “there is something special about information” which is undeniable. Today information society is measured. It is based on visible indicators such are the new technologies, the economic growth due to informational activities, the occupations based on information work, the connected networks, the cultural change.(2006:9-19). As Webster highlights an Information cannot only defined by quantitate measurements but by the qualitative changes that are taking place in the every day life.(2006:23) . For example, internet made the communication easier, faster, more reliable where people can be connected without being physical in the same geographical place. A new era is here. It is global and there are countries that are more or less excluded. According to Webster’s (2006:10-11) technological definition: “media regularly features accounts of the arrival of an information superhighway on which the populace must become adept at driving”. In order to understand the Greek case we need to focus on two sides: That of a country being a part of the EU network and Greece as an ensemble with its very own characteristics. It seems that develops towards the concept of the Information society a “peculiar” behaviour (Bourcas, 2006), which can be explained not only by presenting quantitative measurements on the use of internet and on the ICT (Webster,2006:10) but by taking into consideration the qualitative effects of those measurements and what they mean for the society as a whole.
Greece as a “node” in the European Union’s network
Having a closer look on Greece, it should be taken into account that as a country is not a separate realm of this world. As such it is influenced by other countries and tries to follow the progress.
Reflecting on Castells theory for the network society (2004: p.2-4), Greece could be considered as a node in the whole network of the European Union, connected with other nodes (member states) by channels based on electronic communication (ICTs) , where information flows in between them and thus contribute to the network’s goal. Taking this theory literally, Greece is not an Information society but it is a part of a whole network, this of European Unions. As a result, it is definitely affected by the global changes and as a member -state of the European Union is obliged to follow all the relevant policies.
Studying on the Greek actions regarding the Information society one can come across a bulk of policies and strategies done by the Greek government, in order to follow EU’s steps towards an Information society and the digital convergence. It is really doubtful If Greece without the prompts of the EU would have ever bothered to enter to the “new world”. By having a quick overview in the history of the adopted policies we can come out with some conclusions.
In 1977, it was first decided by the Greek government at that time, the conversion of the telephone system from analog to digital. The implementation of this proposal took place twenty years later and after a lot of arguments between the major two political parties which were on power at that time. (Kalogirou, 2012:21). This first incident of delay to implement the decision was only the beginning of many other initiatives that followed and which they were left in packed piles.
According to Castells theory “when nodes become redundant or useless, networks tend to reconfigure themselves, deleting some nodes and adding new ones”(Castells,2004:1). Therefore, in order Greece to follow the European progress and not to be cut off, important steps were decided and taken by the Greek government in the mid 1990’s. Two White papers were issued in 1995 and in 1999 highlighting the significance for Greece to enter in the information society and another updated version of the second one later, in 2002. Both of them introduced two different major projects-the national information network EDET and the Operational Programme for the Information Society (OPIS). Both of them were funded by the European Union. The goals of those programmes were different each time but their strategies were focused on: the modernisation of the state economy, the simplification of the bureaucracy, the development of the telecommunication systems, education and culture, the digital economy and employment and finally to create a quality of life for the citizens. Several bodies as well have been set up in order to observe and control the implementation of this programme, as all those programmes had several difficulties in implementation. (Bourcas, 2006: 12-14).
However the overall performance was low. Greece had serious problems in absorbing in a right and reliable way the EU funds and to apply the design of the strategies in practise. The road towards an information society is rough and difficult (kalogirou, 2012). There are still major lags on the use of ICT in major sectors of Greek society such as the public administration systems, the digital organisation of health, the diffusion of broadband penetration (despite the steps of progress that have been done), the digitalisation and the interconnection of the recruitment offices and so on. (kalogirou, 2012:10)
Today under the common frame of Digital Agenda and the funding of the National Strategic Reference Framework, European commission approves and Greece adopts another programme which is called “Digital Convergence” and emphasizes on competitive Greek sectors such as tourism, shipping, culture and sports.” (source: European commission, regional policy [14/12/2012])
As Castells states (2004:1), networks cooperate or compete with each other. In this case , EU as a network seems to be in an on-going completion with other networks (countries) in a global scale. According to a report by the International Telecommunication Union based on the use of ICT, eight out of the ten top ranked countries, are from Europe (ITU, 2012: 21). This means that within EU some of its nodes (the member states) are using the information and communication technologies effectively than others. This ranking is based on technological indicators. What is really happening is that those countries might be ranked first on the world’s top list, but there is a significant gap between the performance of the developed and developing countries. European Union is digitally divided. Returning to Castells theory (2004:1) as the network’s competence depends on the performance of its nodes; Greece definitely needs to catch up. Country’s position in EU information society is low. “The peripheral states, especially those in Mediterranean region, still lag behind in the adoption of ICT practises in contrast to the more developed states in the northern Europe. Greece belongs to the group of less developed countries with respect to the evolution of information society.”(Kougiountakis &Petrakis, 2006:117). As a result even If Greece is a part of the whole EU network, its performance on the information and knowledge which according to Castells (2004:7) is the power of all society is low and certainly is not defined as an Information society. But it needs also to be seen as a unit and not a node that has its own character, it’s on quality which reflects on the percentages which are presented below:
3. Greek Information society in numbers- a different perspective
According to Webster (2006:9) “new technologies are one of the most visible indicators of new times and by that lead us to the coming of a new Information society”. The main indicators for measuring Greece as an Information society, are coming from different bodies of the EU as well as from other internal organisations. What it is measured here is: the use of ICT and the Internet by Individuals, the use of ICT and the Internet by enterprise, the broadband penetration and other indicators such as e-government, e-commerce, e-Learning, e-Health, etc. Although there are arguments about the technological definition most of the evaluations are based on the quantities and possession of this technology and possible about the theoretical knowledge around it (Webster, 2006). The statistic results below are giving a more concrete descript of the Greek placement in the information society.
The use of ICT and the Internet by Individuals
In 2011, 54% of the population was using pc either at home or at work, which is quite beneath the European average of 73%. The same year the 52% of the population was using the internet and only the 39% was looking for finding information on goods or services.(source: Eurostat, [17/12/2012]). Frequent users (i.e. daily users of the internet) are not so many either since they account for 37% of the population, below the EU average of 56%. (source: Digital Agenda, Internet services, [17/12/2012]). What is of importance is that Greece also has one of the highest rates of people who have never used the internet, at a 45%. Specific social groups such as disadvantage people make a use of the internet only 27% which is below the EU average of 51%.
Another important feature is the computer or the internet skills of the individuals. There are lots of individuals who appear not having any ICT skills at all or with quite low skill using the internet. In numbers only the 49%of the Greeks have some level of computer skills and 54% have some internet skills. Both rates are below the average of the EU (source: Digital Agenda, Internet Services,[17/12/2012]).In 2010, penetration rates are much higher to young population between the ages 16-34, for people with higher education and mostly those who are living in urban and suburban places. (OFDG, 2011:3). It is obvious that in the Greek society there is another division between the population depending on the age, the education and the area.
The use of ICT and the Internet by enterprises
In 2011, the proportion of enterprises with internet access exceeded 90 %. (source: Eurostat, [17/12/2012]). Here it is necessary to understand that there is another digital divide between the large and small/medium enterprises (Kougiountakis &Petrakis, 2006:117). In small enterprises with less than 10 employees only the 57% using a PC in their everyday work, whereas in enterprises with more than ten employees the percentage is reaching the 99%.(OGIS,2008) According to a different survey the 55% of the enterprises in total didn’t use at all a PC .( e-buisness forum,2006). Kalogirou (2012:13) states that 4 out of 10 small enterprises they don’t use at all computers. This fact is very significant in order to understand the overall low performance in this case. The private sector is mainly represented by those small enterprises. Therefore it is pretty obvious what this means for the competitiveness and presence of this sector.
E-government
Only the 11% of the individuals use the internet for contacting public authorities. As for the companies, the 74% of the enterprises with more than 10 people interact online with the public authorities, whereas only the 23% of the small enterprises do the same. (OGIS, 2008)
E-commerce
E-commerce among individuals is still low as an activity in Greece. Only18% of the population using internet for their purchases. That means that 1 out of 5 Greeks have purchased a good or a service online within the last 12 months, compared with an almost 1 out of 2 Europeans. The same behaviour seems that exists in the Greek enterprises no matter if they are large or small. E-Commerce among Greek enterprises is below the EU on average: 6% of Greek large and small enterprises are engaged in e-Commerce sales in 2011, while the EU average was respectively 13% and 12 %.( source: Digital Agenda, 2012, [17/12/2012]).
Broadband penetration
In January 2012, the penetration rate of fixed broadband is 21.8% of the population. Still it is below the EU average 27.7% but is relatively high as it is growing steadily and it is the fourth top country above the EU average. Greece has 56.2% of fixed lines providing speeds of 10 Mbps and below 30 Mbps. The retail of broadband connections decreased to 44% in January 2012 from 49% the year before very likely because of the financial situation. The wireless broadband market depicts a penetration of only 3.7%. (source: Digital Agenda,[17/12/2012])
Mobile telephony
It is very interesting to verify that Greek society maybe is not exploiting with efficiency the use of Information and communication technologies on services, but it confronts it as a product .(I.e. buy smartphones and any other gadgets). According to OGIS survey (2011:5) 95% of the Greeks of all ages own a mobile phone. The consumption of the mobiles is so large and indicates the necessity of the Greeks to have this medium. For Mc Luhan the medium is information as it is itself. (Scannel, 2007:136). For the Greeks the mobile is the extension of their ear. The same doesn’t apply for the use of the personal computers (PC). However, the Greek state remains a “week” and non-intelligent consumer of the services and the systems that are connected to Information and communication technology. A reason could be the fact that we haven’t reached still the amount of the users which will turn over qualitative the current situation (Kalogirou, 2012:15) .
4. An interpretation of those numbers- why it is not an Information Society
From the statistics above it is obvious that Greece overall presents low indicators in the use of technological innovations. In comparison to the average EU of the 27 is somewhere in the middle but in comparison to other Nordic countries is left quite behind. Greece is not an Information society as in a macro levels the stakeholders and the people who are at the crucial governmental points are not using effectively the ICT and thus promoting the country towards an Information society. On the other hand, in a micro level citizens on their behalf are satisfied only with the use of the Internet more in terms of an individual entertainment or getting random information rather than seeing it as something collective which will lead the country to economic development. But are those indicators enough to asses Greece as a non Information Society?
In my opinion, this behaviour doesn’t fit with any of the Webster’s or other definitions but it indicates very well the weakness of the Greek civil society in many terms. There are fundamental structural problems within the Greek society that raise up obstacles in the progress of the information society and make it non-informational.
Apparently, the Age of Information has entered Greece but not entirely. The information revolution didn’t affect Greece in its core but was a notion that transferred mainly through the EU and by the echo of its effects on the development of other western countries. This is not surprising since Greece had in the first place a very peculiar bound with industrialization. Greece is a country without heavy industry. It has been always based mostly on agriculture, tourism and services. (Buchalis& Deimezi, 2003:1). Whereas in Britain the industrial revolution happened in the 18th century, in Greece industrialisation appeared just in the beginning of 1930’s. (Bourcas, 2006). As a result and accordingly to Perez’s (2009:5) five stages of technological revolution, Greece seems to be left behind as the new policies towards the Information society were just developed in the 1990’s. For all those new Schumpeterian’s researches that believe that the major technological innovations in communication confirmed the emergence of a new epoch (Websters,2006:10), Greece seems to have its own unique differences. “The industrialisation in Greece was accompanied with increased urbanisation, the huge growth of the public sector and the emerging of a private sector which was regulated by clientelistic relations”. (Bourcas, 2006:18-19). These relations are responsible for major problems in our society and for the development of the corruption in the upper levels of authorities. It is possible that the lack of implementation of the EU policies for the information society it is because of this system which complicates everything and except the private sector is intruding as well the public and prevents every effort that is ready to be applied.
In a macro level another negative aspect that likely left Greece behind in terms of forming an Information society, was the lack of a collective culture. (Bourcas, 2006). Because of the results of the clientelism and the special relationship between the state and the citizen, individualism has taken over the “common good” and maybe that is a reason as well why Greece doesn’t progress.
Greek society might appear individualist when it has to do with the national interest but in a micro level, when transactions are needed for everyday activities such as banking, shopping, visiting the doctor or interacting with the authorities; Greeks prefer much better the interpersonal contact (e-business forum, 2007). They prefer sorting their commitments by visiting in person the services than using any other technological medium. In contrast to the northern countries where people prefer to complete their personal tasks in a more individual way but on the other hand appear to have a more collective identity. As a result the usage of internet for cases like that is quite limited. This is either a cultural matter or a difficulty to adapt to the new changes brought by technology.
In 2006, according to a comparative report on Conclusions and Trends, the main reasons for the abstention from the use of the internet and other ICT was firstly, that people don’t need them, secondly, that they don’t care about and thirdly, that they are not interested in buying any other broadband services (e-business forum, 2007). Another major point is that people don’t trust the online services for their transactions, in terms of privacy and giving away personal data. A part of the Greek population could be also characterised as technophobic since it denies completely interfering with any type of technology. The fact is that privacy is hard to define and varies from culture to culture and era to era (David Lyon, 2007:7). Nevertheless, Greece could not even characterised as a surveillance society since there are no developed technological systems which are massively used. Normally “It occurs in the everyday life of all societies that depend on bureaucratic administrations and some kinds of information technology” (David Lyon, 2007:14). Although Greece has an enormous size of bureaucracy the electronic systems of collecting data are still in a primitive stage. The same can be identified for the e-government services. The reality here is that apart from TAXIS system, which gives taxpayers the possibility to submit their VAT declarations and to pay their debts electronically, there are little other established e-government initiatives. (Buchalis &Deimezi, 2003:1). That means that there is a general lack of other services and actions to go digital.
In the economic arena regarding the information activity, Greece is not very active. As there is a digital gap between the size of the enterprises and as the majority of the small/medium who rule the market in the private sector show low levels of performance, Greece doesn’t use the information activity for its economic growth (Webster, 2006:12). Moreover, the economic crisis in 2011 made things more difficult. Greek ICT sector economic activity indicators began to decrease as well. (Source: OTE, towards a Digital Greece, [17/12/2012]). Moreover, the Broadband penetration might be increasing steadily but as the 45% of the population don’t use internet at all there are obviously obstacles on its diffusion to the society.
Greece is far away of being an Information Society as only a small proportion of the Greek citizens are skilled in the usage of internet and information and communication technologies. More than the half of the population have really low skills. The digital literacy gap between the Greeks and the other Europeans has increased dramatically. (OFDG,2007-2010:14-15) This has a serious impact not only on the life of the indivuals but also in other sectors in the society such as in employment. The expectations of the competences today are very high and Greeks likely could not compete in the working arena of information if they don’t invest on their IT education.
Conclusion
To conclude, Greece appears to have serious delays towards the forming of an Information Society. Regardless any definition its ranking is quite low according the indicators that measure the information society. For some countries this age is the age of Information, a step forward after Industrialism, a new era. For Greece and probably other countries, information society is still in progress facing random difficulties and internal digital divisions which dissociate it from the global development. As part of the European network needs to be included by finding the right channels to communicate efficiently with the other countries, overcome the obstacles and succeed in convergence. The difficult financial situation which is under could be confronted efficiently with investments and business action on the information sector. Greece has to utilize in depth all the strategies that has taken by now in order to create a dynamic information society provided if only would leave dark times behind.

References
Electronic Sources for statistics and data:
Digital Agenda, Scoreboard for Greece, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/digital-agenda/en/scoreboard/greece (17/12/2012)
E-Business Forum, (2007), A comparative report on Conclusions and Trends, Athens: EDET available at: www.ebuisnessforum.gr (17/12/2012) (in Greek)
European Commission: Operational programme “Digital Convergence”, available at: http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy/country/prordn/details_new.cfm?gv_PAY=GR&gv_reg=ALL&gv_PGM=1247&LAN=7&gv_per=2&gv_defL=7 (14/12/2012)
Eurostat, (2012), “Information Society Statistics”, available at: http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/statistics_explained/index.php/Information_society_statistics#Further_Eurostat_information (17/12/2012)
Observatory for Digital Greece,27-29 Mai (2008) A presentation on: Measuring Greek Information Society, Geneve: OFDG available at: http://www.observatory.gr/Files/Meletes/080527_eEurope_Geneve.pdf, (17/12/2012)
Observatory for Digital Greece, (2011), Use of the internet by the Greek population, Athens: OFDG, available at: http://www.observatory.gr/files/meletes/A100526 (17/12/2012) (in Greek)
Observatory for Digital Greece, (2007-2010), Digital Literacy in Greece and in the EU-27, Athens: OFDG, available at: http://www.observatory.gr/files/meletes (17/12/2012) (in Greek)
Articles
Bourcas D., (2005), "Encountering the national variations of the information society: the peculiarities the ‘Greek model’", (electronic), 2nd LSE Symposium on Modern Greece, available at www.lse.ac.uk , pp 1-25 [14/12/2012]
Buchalis, D. and Deimezi, O. (2003), “Information Technology penetration and e Commerce developments in Greece, with a focus on Small to Medium-sized Enterprises Electronic Markets”, (electronic), 13 (4), available at http://epubs.surrey.ac.uk/1105/ . pp. 1-14. [14/12/2012]
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.

International Communication Union, (2012), Measuring the Information Society, Geneva: ITU publications, available at: http://www.itu.int/ITU-D/ict/publications/idi/material/2012/MIS2012_without_Annex_4.pdf Kalogirou G., (2012), "Information Society in Greece: A difficult road. A first estimated report , 2nd summit of Economic and Social History: The markets, politics, University of Thessalia, Private interests and public authority, pp.1-27 available at: http://www.liee-ntua.gr/?p=1706 (in Greek) [14/12/2012]

Kourgiantakis M. and Emmanuel P., (2006) "The Information Society in Greece":Sociedade da Informacion en espacios perifericos. Novas Formas de exclusion Social, Universidado de santiago de Compostela, pp. 116-125 avalaible at: http://www.fceer.org/bdoc/recursos/libroferras.pdf [14/12/2012]

Lyon, D. (2007) Surveillance Studies: An overview. Routledge, pp. 1-70
Scannel, P. (2007). “Communication and Technologies: Innis, McLuhan”, Canada, 1950s-1960s,v Media and Communication. Sage Publications. Chapter 5pp. 123-144
OTE, “Towards digital Greece”, available at: http://www.ote.gr/cr2011/en/towards-digital-greece.html [17/12/2012]
Perez, C. (2009) “Technological Revolutions and Techno-Economic Paradigms”. TOC/TUT Working Paper, 20. Online at www.carlotaperez.org
Webster, F. (2006) Theories of the Information Society (3th edition), Sage Publications, Chapter 3. Post-Industrial Society: Daniel Bell, pp. 32-59.

Webster, F. (2006) Theories of the Information Society (3th edition), Sage Publications, Chapter 1 & 2, pp. 1-31.

--------------------------------------------
[ 1 ]. source: Operational Programme “Digital convergence” at http://ec.europa.eu/regional_policy [14/12/2012]
[ 2 ]. It is a political system at the heart of which is an asymmetric relationship between groups of political actors described as patrons and clients and political parties.( source http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clientelism [7/12/2012])
[ 3 ]. Source: OTE, Towards digital Greece, http://www.ote.gr/cr2011/en/towards-digital-greece.html [17/12/2012]