From the Editors

A recent cover story published by one of the most inºuential magazines in the world, the Economist (March 12–18, 2005), revealed for its readers the “Real Digital Divide.” The lead essay (written primarily by technology editor Tom Standage) pointed to an unexpected shift in the world’s attention from computers as the main technology deªning the digital divide to the cell phone. The tone of the article, characteristically, was that of a scold pointing to old shibboleths that have been proven false. First, readers were warned that one proposal to resolve the digital divide—creating a global infrastructure fund focused on computers and the Internet—was especially misguided. According to the authors, markets work better. Second, readers were admonished to shift their attention from the Internet to the increasingly ubiquitous cell phone. The Economist is right in insisting that ICT for development policies need to be constantly reevaluated in light of the current best research ªndings. For example, it takes a justiªably critical look at an overreliance on telecenters as the once-favored answer to digital divides. At the same time, the Economist commits similar errors of oversimpliªcation of which it accuses others. It creates a straw man (in the form of an Internet-for-development evangelist), which it then easily knocks down. It accomplishes this by substituting one kind of new technology, mobile phones, for another kind of new technology. It may well be that the mobile phone is an easy answer to some parts of the digital divide; but probably not. More likely, no single technology will be an answer to the digital divide however it is deªned. There are no silver bullets, whether wired or wireless, state- or market-driven, mobile or ªxed. And these technologies need to be seen in the wider communication and informational environment in which they