The Digital Divide Gap is Shortening

It is true that the access to computers and the Internet is limited for some specific groups such as low income families and it is also true that because of this discrepancy, the participation of users who have limited access to such resources interact less with the media available to them. These realities refer to the digital divide and the participation gap. What Kevin Guidry from the Indiana University says in his 2007 article about these two concepts is different from the reality today.

 Improvement Apparent but Disparities Exist

                If one thing can surely be said about the digital divide today, it would be that there is less of a divide than was apparent 5 years ago. According to a study done by the Pew Research Center from 2012, digital differences have been reduced because of “increased internet adoption and the rise of mobile connectivity.” As of now, 88% of Americans own a mobile phone. Of course the ownership of digital gadgets is still a little influenced by age, education and household income, but recently we have seen the gap closing. With regards to age, disparity still exists in that older adults are less inclined to use digital technology as much, but the Pew Research Center study concluded that some digital devices such as tablets and e-book readers “are as popular or even more popular with adults in their thirties and forties than young adults ages 18-29.” Furthermore, with regards to race, we saw that Kevin Guidry said African Americans and Latinos were less likely to own such digital devices. In 2012, however, we see that this gap is closing because now, “both African Americans and English-speaking Latinos are as likely as whites to own any sort of mobile phone.” Yes, the gap isn’t completely bridged, but there has been significant improvement.

Bridging the Gap Can Occur Through Mobile Politics

                The increasing prominence of digital technology is exhibited quite well by the recent marriage between mobile technology and politics. What we see now is the push of political campaigns toward getting their messages out via mobile technology, whether it’s through a text message or posting on a social network site that is mostly accessed by mobile internet. Of all registered voters who own a cell phone, 27% use their phone to “keep up with news related to the election itself or to political issues in general.” These users are signing up to receive text messages from the campaign itself and using texting and social networking to comment on the campaign in general or interact with other voters. Similar to the universal trend, disparities exist in that older voters still use traditional media to get political news and that liberals are a little bit more likely to use their phone to get political news. Despite this, a general move toward transmitting information digitally is evident.

With the Divide Closing, New Questions Arise

                By looking at the specific trends of mobile politics and the general trends of digital device ownership, I think that the future of digital devices such as the mobile phone will be more universal in access and audience. The problem won’t be that there is a divide in ownership, but that there will be a divide in quality. Five years from now, mostly everyone will own a mobile device, but the quality of the device (ex. Whether it’s a smartphone or not) will be dependent on personal factors such as income. Also, as the generation of children that grew up with technology grows up, soon the population will be filled with mostly all tech savvy people. At this point, we can say that in the future, sharing information digitally is becoming a standard that everyone will have access to regardless of the quality of the device.

Despite rough patches, Nollywood still prospers in the heart of all Africans.

The fast growing Nigerian film industry, Nollywood, only trails behind Hollywood and Bollywood with regards to revenue. It churns out more than a thousand movies a year on average and is now one of Nigeria’s largest sources of private sector employment. The movies itself are apparently cheaply made and horrible in quality, so how did Nollywood develop into a $500 million industry?

 

Nigerian Film Begins With Colonial Influences But Becomes Own Industry After Independence

What is unique about Nollywood, or the Nigerian film industry, is that it wasn’t really started by the Nigerian people at all. Heavily influenced by the colonialism and cultural imperialism, the cultural film unit established by the British government in Nigeria during World War II was geared toward producing propagandistic films for the indigenous people. The Nigerians did have films, but they were in no way a form of entertainment for them. On one hand, there was the colonial government making films showing the wonders of becoming civilized and praising British efforts in Nigeria. To make matters worse, colonialism brought the onset of missionaries; if films weren’t about the government related activities, they were about religion—attempting to convert Nigerians to Christianity.

                In the post-independence era of the 1960s, however, Nigeria had a move toward nationalistic measures—reclaiming the geographical entity that was Nigeria and making a national identity for themselves.  Consequently, truly Nigerian professional filmmaking came in 1963 with a documentary-drama type movie, Culture in Transition, which was about the discrepancies of traditional and modern Nigerian culture after the colonial period. Many didn’t consider this a real film feature so the official marker of real, private, individual film production in Nigeria came later in 1970 with the production of Kongi’s Harvest.

Fixing the Trend of a Monopolized Film Industry

Major motion pictures didn’t take off immediately so much of the early business was monopolized by the Yoruba traveling theater. Once a group of actors that traveled and performed plays, they adapted with the new technology and used a different medium (film) to convey their material. In fact, many of the film production companies were originally part of the Yoruba traveling theatre; 60% of films that were played in the first film festival in Nigeria were from this group.

This trend of monopolization has continued into the present with a new overlord though. Currently, Silverbird Cinemas holds a monopoly and they focus on creating a “New Nollywood” where the films are meant to be shown on big Nigerian multiplexes and theaters abroad. While the idea of commercializing in this way may sound like a good idea, the problem is that the films are targeted toward the affluent, urban young. Not only this, but Nigeria lacks accessible movie theaters; there are not that many, and if there are, the tickets are too expensive. In many ways, Nollywood has been commercialized by the elite. As a result the public that is left out resorts to piracy to watch movies. In an effort to make Nollywood a more public, accessible business model and decrease the piracy that cripples the industry, there has been a move to create chains of community theaters that can encompass a wider audience. One step taken toward a public business model is an online distributing site that was made in 2010—it compiles Nigerian films that subscribers from all over the world can watch. This type of distribution, already common in the US, is referred to as the “Netflix of Africa".

Popular Culture Includes Nationalistic Movies and an Iconic Actress

         Of the recent movies released in Nollywood, the most popular include movies such as Aramotu and Mirror Boy. Aramotu won numerous awards at the Africa Movie Academy Awards and emerged as the best Nigerian film. It is mix of different genres—part history, part fiction and part myth. The main character is a young Yoruba girl who deals with issues of feminism and despotic leaders through a fictional plot. It’s not surprising that such a film would become popular; it expresses nationalistic views and the main character is relatable in that the issues she faces are something that all Nigerians deal with. Mirror Boy on the other hand was popular not for its plot but for the lead actress, Genevieve Nnaji.

To put into perspective the icon she has become for Nollywood, outsiders consider her to be the Julia Roberts of Nigerian film; she is the sweetheart of Africa and the poster girl for Nollywood. Starting with Nollywood at age 8, she is now an instantly recognizable face in Africa and has won several awards, including the African Academy Movie Award for Best Actress in 2005. Her growing international fame is apparent as she was interviewed by CNN here in the US.

Nollywood Can Be Its Own Entity

                While we can see that Nollywood has been and still is developing an identity, American characteristics often see their way into the Nigerian industry. The most blatant influence is in the name itself—Nollywood. The name was coined in 2002 article that appeared in an American newspaper, the New York Times. Despite the fact that the Nigerian film industry developed independently, it is still connected to the American Hollywood as if it were its derivative. While the name caught on, we can’t help but think that this name is reminiscent of the dependency of Nigeria on higher powers during the colonial period. 

 This isn’t the case at all though. While Nigerian film may not be popular or heard of in America, Nollywood is huge for not only Nigeria but many other African countries as well. While the quality of movies may be bad, the fact remains that it provides entertainment across boundaries in an otherwise fragmented country. Because of this unconditional popularity, Nollywood is expected to grow, prosper, and improve in the future.