francisco, k. ecrea paper
DESCRIPTION
TRANSCRIPT
Mobile phones and their use by different generations: an analysis of the use of
media by Portuguese families.
Kárita Cristina Francisco
FCSH-UNL/FCT/CIMJ
Abstract: Nowadays mobile phones have been the fastest adopted technology ever. The
greatest part of its relevance lies in empowering people to engage in communication and
at the same time freeing people from the constraints of physical proximity and spatial
immobility.
Based on these thoughts, this paper intends to verify and analyze the use of mobile
phones by different 26 people from 13 different families1 (an adolescent and a parent).
This includes usage intensity and also the variety of use these people make of their
phones.
Keywords: mobile phones, young people, parents, social capital.
The digital divide
When talking about technologies, especially the new information and communication
technologies, a subject that comes up more frequently is the digital divide. Livingstone
(2007:3) affirms that the “digital divide” has received considerable attention from
academics and policies lately, “drawing attention to divisions within and across
societies according to those that have access to digital technologies (including the
internet) and those that do not”.
To Peter and Valkenburg (2006: 294) the term “was coined in particular to describe
inequalities in access to the internet as a result of varying socio-economic, cognitive,
and cultural resources”, but some authors have criticized that the term has been used
only as way to refer “to the gap between “have” and “have-nots” regarding internet
access, while other digital divide phenomena such as differences in internet use are
ignored”. Although the majority of studies regarding the digital divide analyses the
1 This study is part of the Project Digital Inclusion and Participation. Comparing the trajectories of digital media use by majority and disadvantaged groups in Portugal and the USA being developed by a group of researchers from Portuguese Universities and from the University of Austin/Texas. The project is coordinated by Cristina Ponte (FCSH-UNL), José Azevedo (FL-UP) and Joseph Straubhaar (UTA).
possession and use of the computer and internet, other devices have to be considered, as
the mobile phones.
One of the theoretical approaches to the digital divide phenomena described by Peter
and Valkenburg (2006:297) is the emerging digital differentiation approach. It states
that the “adolescent’s use of the internet, for example, will depend on their socio-
economic, cognitive, and cultural resources”. This relationship regarding the use of
internet can also be applied to the use of other ICTs, as the mobile phones, respecting
the differences of the medium (Peter and Valkenburg, 2006: 297-298).
Similar thoughts are shared by Rojas et at (2010:3) who verified in their studies2 that
other factors besides income remain in place regarding to the digital divide as: “the
ability to afford access, notably group dispositions or habitus, based in part on income
disparities, but also education, cultural patterns, family trajectories, and the structure of
opportunities”. The authors have based their approach on Bourdieu “concepts of
habitus3, field, and capital to elaborate the continuity, regularity and regulated
transformation of social action, such as technology use by individuals and groups”.
In Bourdieu (Nogueira, 2002) the individual is a socially configured actor: the
preferences, the skills, the body posture, the intonation of voice, the professional
aspirations for the future, everything would be socially constituted, dynamic but also
originated from a set of historical relationships, through which individuals incorporate a
set of dispositions for the typical action of this position (a family or a class habitus).
Rojas et al. (2010:4-5) state that to understand an individual’s disposition toward a
technology a number of “combinations of interrelated factors or characteristics should
be analyzed – notably, economic capital, cultural capital, linguistic capital, ethnicity,
age and gender[…]and when these dispositions are held by a number of people in the
same class circumstances, we can speak of a class habitus toward technology, or a
techno-habitus.”
The authors also affirm that an individual’s relationship with technology not only
2 The first was conducted in Fall 1999 and Spring 2000 and the second and more recently one in Spring 2009.
3 Bourdieu describes the habitus “not only a structuring structure, which organizes practices and the perception of practices, but also a structured structure: the principle of division into logical classes which organizes the perception of the social world is itself the product of internalization of the division into social classes. Each class condition is defined, simultaneously, by its intrinsic properties and by the relational properties which it derives from its position in the systems of class conditions, which is also a system of differences…” (Bourdieu, 1984:170-172).
depends on how much they know about it or if they have the resources to access it.
These “techno-dispositions are delineated by such indicators as social practices,
perceptions and attitudes, technical education, awareness of technology, desire for
information, job requirements, social relations, community interactions, and geographic
location. Social practices include an individual’s and family’s history of technology use,
especially the internet and other ICTs, as well as patterns of mass media consumption
(e.g. radio, television, film)” (Rojas et al., 2010:7).
In another perspective, but keeping the central idea, Neil Selwyn argues that mere
access is insufficient to ensure equality of opportunity. “A lack of meaningful use … is
not necessarily due to technological factors ... or even psychological factors …
engagement with ICTs is based around a complex mixture of social, psychological,
economic and, above all, pragmatic reasons” (Selwyn, 2004b: 349 in Livingstone,
2007:3-4).
Livingstone (2007:4) reminds us that “technological innovation requires a recurrent
investment of money, time and effort on the part of the general public and, in this
process, social stratification continues to matter”.
In the same path, Peter and Valkenburg (2006:295) say that “socio-economic, cognitive,
and cultural resources generally affect the likelihood that a person will achieve
particular material or immaterial goals”. The research of the authors was conducted with
adolescents and the impact of socio-economic and cognitive resources in their results
were remarkable (2006: 302). The authors also found out that although “digital
technology adds a new quality of life, their use may not transcend the boundaries of
social inequality.”
Being more specific and analyzing only one of the ICTs, the mobile phone, Geser
(2004:6) considers it a technology with highly generalized integrative functions: “By
being adopted irrespective of education and family background, the mobile phone
bridges at least some gaps between different social classes”.
Although the possession of mobile phones each day becomes more ubiquitous and
present in the diverse segments of population “Mobile phones may still accentuate
social inequalities insofar as their factual usage patterns are tightly correlated with the
various purposes of social actions, as well as with different situations, social
relationships and social roles” (Geser, 2004:6).
Thus, although being a more accessible technology for owning, the use people make of
them is deeply related to social relationships but also to socioeconomic status, once
having a more sophisticated or spending more money with some applications depends
on the money you have or the social role you assume. Some people couldn’t afford an
expensive device, but do it because of status4.
From outside world to the domestic space: the conflict of new media at home
If outside the domestic sphere we have this entire dilemma regarding the access and use
of the communication and information technologies, once the members of the family
surpass or follow a pre-existing culture in family organization regarding the ICT and
media, another dilemma starts since this family culture may change profoundly.
According to Horst (2010:151) it´s not easy to be a parent in this new media context,
“once home and family environments reflect the values, morals, and aspirations of
families as well as beliefs about the importance and effects of new media for learning
and communication” (Horst, 2010:151).A home’s economy of meaning results from the
everyday practices of household members, who thereby give meaning to the objects
with which they share their environment. For example, the mobile phone is part of the
general economy of a society because it has a set range of prices, officially recognized
functions, and a value that is more or less shared collectively. These aspects accompany
the techno-object when it is integrated into a family system, but they are also confronted
with the economic principles of the existing domestic ecology. Thus, the mobile phone
is at the heart of the daily interactions of a family because it allows members to contact
one another at any time (Caron and Caronia 2007:60).
When talking about families, the same way “Young people engage with new media
based on friendship driven and interest-driven genres of participation, parents and
adults’ attitudes toward new media reflect their own motivations and beliefs about
parenting as well as their personal histories and interests in media”. The most common
are the educational goals and a better future for their children, but in the case of mobile
phones, the first mentioned is safety (Horst, 2010:150).
For poor families, those which cannot offer a computer with internet broadband for their
children, the mobile phone appears as a possibility of integrating these children in an
information society, and keeping them less digitally excluded. Horst points out that as
well as for those families which can afford a little more of new technology, like cameras
4 We also have to remember that some people, even either without a great amount of money or without money at all obtain their devices by illicit ways.
and computers, these devices “become meaningful to many families because they
represent an investment in their child’s future, one that they hope will ensure their
children’s success in education, work, and income generation (2010:150)”.
But this offering of new media technology or its presence at home is not completely
peaceful. On the contrary, the author states that parents live surrounded by ambivalent
feelings as anxiety and discomfort and on the other hand the feeling of protection and
safety they can offer by the owning of mobile phones, for example. “The integration of
new media into the home also reflects concerns about independence, separation and
autonomy”, very common feelings and situations during teenage years.
To Silverstone et al (1992:15) communication and information technologies pose
especial problems simply because they are not just objects: they are media. “But
communication and information technologies have a functional significance, as media;
they provide, actively, interactively or passively, links between households, and
individual members of households, with the world beyond their front door, and they do
this (or fail to do this) in complex and often contradictory ways. Information and
communication technologies are […] doubly articulated into public and private
cultures” (Silverstone, Hirsh, Morley, 1992:15).
The Portuguese Mobile Context
In a European perspective, the Eurobarometer 248 studied parent’s views and
supervision about their children’s use of the internet and mobile phones. The children
and young people considered for this study were from 6 to 17 years old and 60% of the
Portuguese ones had mobile phones.
Among the Portuguese studies, the Survey on the Use of Information and
Communication Technology for Families (INE, 2009) from 2005 to 2008 presented that
there was an intensification of the use of mobile phone among the age group from 10 to
15 years old from 73.3% in 2007 to 84.6% in 2008. In 2008, according to the age
groups, from 16 to 24 years old, 97.1% used a mobile phone; also from 25-34 years old,
95.3% used a mobile phone, from 35-44 years old, 92.4%. After this subtle decrease
related to age, as far as the age increases, we verify a more stressed decrease in the
number of users of mobile phones: from 45-54 years old, 86.9%; from 55-64 years old,
76.3%; from 65-74 years old, 51.3%.
Another study conducted in Portugal for the Media Regulatory Entity (ERC) with
children from 9 to 17 years old, the mobile phone appears as the second technological
medium more present among the group from 15-17 years old and more than 25% of
them have a device with internet. Still, this group prefers the new media and also those
which offer options related to informatics, music, audiovisual, games and mobility
(ERC, 2008: 188).
The E-Generation was a survey conducted along Portugal that interviewed children and
young people about media from 8 to 18 years old, divided into three age groups: 8-12,
13-15 and 16-18 years old. In the 13-15 year-old-group there was a possession index of
94.2%, while in the group from 16-18 years old this number increased to 99.5%. In
these two groups, around 1% of the adolescents had mobile individual plans. Also, the
money spent with the mobile top up increases as far as the age increases. Making and
receiving calls also increase with the age as well as sending and receiving SMS5 more
often daily, using the Instant Messaging and surfing on internet via mobile phone –
though this rate is really low.
Methodology and sample
Among the objectives of the Project Digital Inclusion and Participation is the understanding
of the conditions and tendencies for access and appropriation by users and non-users of
digital media, with a focus on families and groups which are digitally excluded and in
the digital integration of children and youth.
During its first phase 130 people were interviewed, one young and another older
member of the same family that talked about their experiences with media in general,
which comprised the history of the family- mobility, education, SES (socioeconomic
status) - and the personal history with media. The method consisted in semi-structured
interviews.
From the 13 families6 selected as our sample, the younger members were six boys and
seven girls, from 15-18 years old, all of them students - from middle school to high
school and one girl that has already entered the University - eight of them affirm using
the internet frequently and 5 of them say they use it sometimes.
5 SMS (Short Message Service) is used as a synonym for text messaging
6 In fact, 14 families had young people from 15-18 years old interviewed, but one family a grandmother was interviewed as the older member, which would present a different use of mobile phone that would not be similar to other parents, especially because of her age. So this family was put aside in this analysis.
The group of adults is formed for 13 parents, 12 of them from 37 to 49 years old and
one mother that is 28 years old. Among these parents five have graduation level, three
high school level completed and one incomplete and four have 9 years or less of school.
Among these parents five never or rarely use internet; seven use internet very frequently
and one says using the internet just sometimes. We can observe that the use of the
internet by the parents is in the edge of both sides: use and non-use. This ambience of
intimacy or not with internet may be an indication of the way people also handle with
another new technology: the mobile phone.
Mobile phones in the context of families and their uses
Among the 13 families interviewed, only one boy affirmed having lost his mobile phone
and a young girl had a kind of familiar mobile phone which was left at home all the
time and used when necessary, also by her mother. Among the parents, only this mother
shared this mobile phone and another mother who affirmed she didn’t have one device.
In some of these families, on the other hand, the number of devices overcame the
number of members of the family. One of the interviewee when questioned if he had a
mobile phone answered:
“I have one, my mother has two or three. My father has two. My sister has one.” (16,
male, assiduous internet user).
When talking about uses, the majority of young people from 15 to 18 years old were
categorical in declaring that the mobile phone is used for making calls and sending
SMS, basically communicational functions.
Being in touch with friends and also with family is mentioned as something really
relevant to some of the adolescents. There are cases in which some adolescents have
new models of mobile phones, with many tools, but they are concerned if the devices
offer them the possibility of communicating with friends:
“Once it’s possible to send SMS and to call my friends…that’s what it is
important.”(16, male, assiduous internet user).
“I just use the mobile phone to contact friends and family.”(17, female, sometimes use
the internet).
Livingstone (2002) states that “Children and young people are at the point in their lives
where they are highly motivated to construct social identities, to create new social
groups and networks and to question cultural meanings. All of these are important
aspects of media and communications technologies and are embedded in peer
relationships and mediated by mobile technologies” (in Haddon and Green, 2009:123).
Jouët and Pasquier also value the social interaction among peers, which could be
represented by meeting with friends or making phone calls. “Their intense social
interaction around the media - and digital screens in particular - attests to the importance
they attribute to the bond between themselves and others, despite interaction which may
seem more functional than affective” (1999:37).
The use of the mobile phone for being in contact with family is also observed in relation
to parents, although they do not show so clearly the need of being in contact with
friends – as the youngest interviewees did – but mention the relevance of using the
mobile phone to be in contact with family and with the outside world.
“Since it makes and receives calls it’s perfectly enough” (41, female, sometimes uses
the internet).
“I use the mobile phone more to talk to my family… when I arrive home at around 6
p.m. I turn it off, because I’m already with my family and I don’t need it anymore.” (41,
male, assiduous internet user).
Some of the young people make a kind of differentiation to whom they call and to
whom they send messages, like calling only parents and sending SMS especially to
friends.
“I use the mobile phone to talk to my family or to communicate with friends through text
messages.” (17, female, sometimes uses the internet)
“I don’t make many calls, more to my parents…”(15, female, sometimes uses the
internet).
This act of calling more the parents may be related to 1) the knowledge parents have
while handling the mobile phones, once it was mentioned by some parents that they do
not know how to type, read or send text messages; 2) the price and limited amount of
money young people have to top-up their mobile phones.
But the use of mobile phones is definitely not restricted to these actions among young
people. This sending of SMS is just part of a routine of communication with peers to
find out what they are doing, to establish who they are and to establish a position in a
peer group.
Caron and Caronia (2007:5) explain that “when adolescents use text messages (SMS) to
chat, flirt, and gossip, when they engage in endless instantaneous written exchanges,
they reinterpret the technology to meet the needs of their specific culture”. And they
also emphasize the use of the SMS:
(What kind of uses do you make with your mobile phone?)
“I send messages…”(16, male, assiduous internet user).
“I like to send a lot of SMS.” (18, female, assiduous internet user).
If for the adolescents the text messages are so important for keeping in touch with
friends and a kind of demonstration of belonging to a group, for their parents text
messaging definitely does not present the same relevance, either because parents don’t
know how to use it or because they don’t like it and in both options they prefer calling.
Sending messages could be a good option for parents to talk to their children, but only a
few know how to type, send and read SMS. Parents complain about having to look for
the messages on the mobile phone, having to type searching for the letters, and others
just say that don’t know how to read or send SMS.
“I don’t either know how to read the messages or send them.”(43, female, never uses
the internet).
“Because, as I’m telling you, I don’t have much empathy with the machines... I prefer
to talk and listen to people. Sometimes people send SMS, but I am not accustomed to go
there and read it”(46, female, sometimes uses the internet).
“I don’t have to look for the letters, since it calls it’s enough.”(41, female, sometimes
uses the internet).
Parents that do use the SMS – few ones - take advantages of it communicating with
their children. One of the mothers even thinks SMS can be a polite way of contacting
someone:
“I think the SMS is good because it’s not invasive. You can send a message with an idea
to a person without bothering the person, and this I think it’s really good.” (47, female,
assiduous internet user).
When the topic is listening to music, Jouët and Pasquier (1999:32) found out that for the
teens’ group, listening to music plays a decisive role, since music is one of their main
subject of interest.
Young people also enjoy listening to music all the time as a way of avoiding boredom.
It’s really common to have the mobile phone working as MP3 since it is together with
the owner everywhere he/she goes. And this use for listening to music is really stated in
the group of young people interviewed.
“I also use my mobile phone as MP3 player to listen to music”(16, male, assiduous
internet user).
“As I’m always with my mobile phone so I am used to listen to radio this way.”(15,
female, sometimes uses the internet).
When talking about listening to music by the parents of these families, only one mother
referred to making the most of her mobile phone, using all the applications it offers:
“It has so many things! It has a camera, internet, radio, MP3, it makes video calls,
other stuff…it’s a 3G…”…”I use it for everything!”(39, female, rarely uses the
internet).
Based oh these data we can also observe that parents do not mention the use of mobile
phones for entertainment as the group of young people did. For the greatest part of the
parents the mobile phone is a tool used for communication and it doesn’t matter if the
handset offers them more; the use, in most of case is the same: calling. Only one parent
of this group listens to music through the mobile phone, which can be considered
entertainment.
If on one hand parents don’t show any intimacy with the music on the mobile phone, on
the other hand some of them show some interest in cameras and taking photographs.
Although some say it’s rare to take pictures it’s still more common for them to take
pictures than to send SMS.
“I use it to take some pictures.” (47, female, assiduous internet user).
“I have two mobile phones. I receive calls and take photographs with them because they
have all the functionalities.” (47, female, assiduous internet user).
Among the young group, taking photographs is something common, as well as
exchanging photos with friends. Seven adolescents mentioned taking pictures with their
mobile phones:
“I listen to music, make videos, take photographs…” (15, male assiduous internet user).
“When I go somewhere, I take a picture to keep as a memory. I also take pictures of my
family…” (17, female, sometimes uses the internet).
Although parents realize the mobile phones have a lot of applications, for many of
them, they are still telephones and should be handled like that. Even for some young
people the advanced technology the mobile phones present is also amazing and they are
able to notice how fast these improvements have happened:
“I use to say that the mobile phone hasn’t been a mobile phone anymore. It is MP3,
messages. It’s up for everything, less for making calls (laugh)(15, male, assiduous
internet user).
“…Today, talking on the phone is the least….Everybody does everything but talking.
Mine has even a camera.” (16, male, assiduous internet user).
Incorporation
The incorporation of the mobile phones has proved to be really intense among these
young people, more than their parents. When the young people were questioned about
the time they spent with media and which media they spent most of their time, the
mobile phone seems to be one of the first in the list.
“I have the mobile phone always at hand….” (18, female, assiduous internet user).
“During the week it’s most the mobile phone but on the weekend maybe it’s
television.”(15, male, assiduous internet user).
One adolescent girl, when questioned about the media she spent most time with,
answered:
“With the radio, also because of the mobile phone. As I am always with the mobile
phone, then I am used to always listening to radio”. (15, female, sometimes uses the
internet).
Also parents’ discourses about the incorporation of mobile phones in their family lives
are really rich. Some of them give us an exact idea of how incorporate in their daily
routines the mobile phones are: what the mobile phone means for them and how they
handle this technology. Some know that people are not able to contact them, but keep
on doing the same actions; some also recognize that they are not good handling the
mobile phone especially managing its use during the day, as this example:
“I am a disaster with the mobile phone, it’s always turned off (laugh). When people
want to call me they can’t because I always have that turned off…”(41, male, assiduous
internet user).
It’s worth pinpointing how some parents try to encourage children’s independence by
offering them a mobile phone: kids can face the world but keeping a direct line with
parents in case of need. Another common attitude in many families, especially the
working class ones is giving the old useless mobile phone which once was one of the
parent’s handset to the youngest at home.
Another different example of incorporation of technology can be observed by this
mother’s discourse. She has lost her daughter’s mobile phone today and although using
her daughter’s, she has 3 handsets while the use she makes is scarce:
“Today I’ve lost one mobile phone…I have three, but today I’ve lost hers (the younger
daughter, 10 years old)… I use them just to answer calls and for SMS…but taking
picture is rare.”(37, female, never uses the internet).
Other families have really incorporated the mobile phones which mean they use it a lot
and spend time with the device.
“…At home, we even use the mobile phone to talk to one another”(49, female,
assiduous internet user).
“Essentially I contact my family and friends by mobile phone. I am a person who likes
to call although I send a lot of SMS. When I miss someone, I call family and
friends….”(18, female, assiduous internet user).
This family has incorporated the mobile phones in their daily lives especially for
communication among them. They call one another via mobile phone. Another example
is a mother that only communicates with her teenage son via SMS.
“With my son I just use the mobile phone, just the mobile phone. SMS.” (47, female,
assiduous internet user).
In this example of a mother keeping in contact with her son via SMS, Horst (2010:182)
presents a case of a mother who bought a phone on which she has learned to “type”.
She’s been using the mobile to communicate with her son via SMS and it’s been much
easier to keep up with her son’s activities and movements throughout the day, since she
just wants to know where he is and if he is all right. She believes that this increase in
communication actually improved their relationship.
This other interviewed mother shows us one example of a hard kind of not desired
incorporation in the daily routine of the family. She doesn’t like the mobile phone, she
feels watched, but as it is part of the coordination of the family, she has to use it at least
sometimes.
“It’s at home. I don’t have one, it’s at home, and then when it’s necessary it takes me
two seconds giving explanations to some people and it’s all. But I don’t use it and don’t
carry it with me…It’s not from my generation and second I don’t like to
give….satisfaction …” (45, female, assiduous internet user).
These are the ambiguities of the mobile phone, on the one hand it’s good because it
allows you to be in contact with other people at any time you want; but on the other you
become available at any time for other people. And this availability also allows a kind
of remote surveillance by anyone who is interested in, although this bad feeling was felt
only in parents’ interviews.
If on the one hand the mobile phones can make adults feel watched, for some of their
children the mobile phones have become a kind of or a means to satisfy an addiction.
Some young people mentioned the dependence of the mobile phone, as a real need to be
with the device all the time to feel connected with friends, sending SMS and calling. On
the other hand, some people mention being “addicted” to music and listen to it through
the mobile phones. The necessity of having the handset together is related to the
necessity of listening to music and to avoid boredom.
“I’m addicted to it (music). MP3, mobile phone. Romantic, tectonic, RAP music…”(15,
female, assiduous internet user).
“I always have the mobile phone on my hand. Now I can surf on internet and be on the
mobile phone at the same time. I need the internet even on vacation to entertain myself
and the mobile phone is also essential.” (18, female, assiduous internet user).
André Caron and Letizia Caronia (2007:75) affirm that the feeling of becoming
“addicted” to one’s mobile phone is something that arises in the discourse of young
people, however this “urgent need” to communicate does not seem to be perceived in a
negative way.
Costs
The cost of having a mobile phone is something that worries some parents. For this
reason, it’s really common that children and adolescents have pre-paid/pay-as-you-go
phones. Also, the costs influence the kind and amount of uses of some tools, even the
calls, as it is stated by this adolescent:
“Now that I have a new plan I am used to calling my friends a lot” (16, male, assiduous
internet user).
This example indicates how important the money spent on mobile phones are for young
people, who are generally students and especially for our sample that is from simpler
socioeconomic classes. One of the adolescents interviewed said she had a mobile phone
before, but now there’s just one at home that she uses to send messages to her parents
when she arrives home. This girl explains that her mobile phone was taken from her
because she was accustomed to using it in improper hours:
“I abused a little”….“During the night, I used to talk to my friends.” (15, female,
sometimes uses the internet).
Although many of these adolescents’ devices offer internet connection they do not use
it. A plausible explanation for that lack of use is that this group of 15-18 year-old-young
people is formed by students, who depend on the parents’ money to charge their mobile
phones, and surfing on internet via mobile phone doesn’t fit their budget.
(Does your mobile phone have internet?) “Yes, but I don’t use it… it spends a lot…it’s
expensive.” (15, male, assiduous internet user).
Also, they know that if they don’t spend their credit with internet they will be able to
send more text messages and also call their friends more.
Horst (2010:180) verifies that working-class and low-income kids are often acutely
aware of the cost of calls, since young people are afraid of losing their number if they
can’t pay for the credits, which would be similar to losing one’s identity.
One mother has also tried to use the internet for a month, but she didn’t like it:
“I once used it for a month, but I used just a little, because I thought I was paying to
much for a service I used so little.” (47, female, assiduous internet user).
Some parents show their difficulties with expenditures with their mobile phones by
mentioning that they do not make calls, they just receive them – once most of them do
not know how to use the text messaging.
“It´s just to answer calls…sometimes it only receives calls…I don’t make them. I
neither know how to read nor send the messages…I don't have a landline phone at
home and I need the mobile to be contactable.” (43, female, never uses the internet).
Some parents, on the other hand, demonstrate no concern with the cost of buying a very
modern mobile phone. They don’t say anything about expenditures, but they are really
happy to mention that their devices have everything a modern and good one would
present.
Two other parents affirm that now it’s easier to have a mobile phone, because in the
past the devices were really expensive as well as the fees people had to pay to have and
keep one. This reduction of costs as well as the arrival of the pre-paid cards promoted a
widespread of mobile phones and made them more easily available for people with a
low socioeconomic status.
“ I used to use the mobile phone just a little because it was really expensive.”(49,
female, assiduous internet user).
“In 1990, I had a “brick” and it was worth a fortune.” (47, female, assiduous internet
user).
The little use of mobile phones’ potential
Although it could be really attractive, some young and adult interviewees didn’t show
any enthusiasm for realizing a lot of different activities with the applications of their
mobile phones. As stated before, the majority of them – and this also include parents-
was just interested in being able to keep contact with the family and with the outside
world.
Some adolescents showed a real simple use, either because their device is too simple
and do not allow any other activities (like having no camera) and this restricts the use
these people make, or also because they were simply not interested in doing special
things with it:
“…It’s a basic phone, one of those cheap ones that I only have to send messages and
make calls. Just it, nothing else.” (15, female, sometimes uses the internet).
“It was my father’s, it’s a Nokia and it’s been already kind of broken. I can’t do many
things….just sending messages and making calls….”(Does it have internet connection?)
“No, I don’t think so...” (17, male, sometimes uses the internet)
This adolescent is a singular case. Although he uses his father’s old mobile phone –
which is common for kids, but teenagers really like having a new device – he doesn’t
even know the tools of the handset and just make the simplest use of it: making calls
and sending messages.
Caron and Caronia (2007:7) present the ambiguities in relation to the use of
communication technologies by young people. “In their use of new communication
technologies, young people are both extremely innovative and extremely conservative.
This dual nature of teenagers’ approach to technologies creates an effective litmus test-
precisely because it is so extreme – for the inescapable relationship between creativity
and conservatism, innovation and cultural incorporation, which characterizes the
adoption of technologies, although the extent varies with the individual”.
In the case of parents this behavior was even more intense:
“My mobile phone has a camera, voice recorder, MP3, two SIM cards. Basically, what
do I do with it? I receive and make calls and nothing else. Ah, and sometimes I take
some pictures. Thus, although it is really sophisticated it is just used to receive and
make calls, nothing else” (42, female, assiduous internet user).
“This mobile phone has many things that I don’t even know how to use” (47, female,
assiduous internet user).
The simple use some of these young people make of their mobile phones also calls the
attention, because some devices offered a lot of tools which are left aside by the owners,
and some don’t even know the tools their mobiles have. This can be either a question of
priorities, like those teens who just wanted to talk to friends and family or a suggestion
of lack of literacy.
In relation to parents we could identify clearly three groups regarding the use of mobile
phones: a group which uses the device in a very restrictive way, like making and
receiving calls; a second group that could be considered moderate/simple users, which
overcame the act of calling and receiving calls, some of them mastering the sending of
text messages, others the mobile camera; and a third and really small group of
enthusiastic parents that could operate a lot of applications on their devices.
It has to be said, though, that many of these parents trust their children to handle the
devices for them at some moment. One of the mothers says she doesn’t pay attention to
the messages and her son is the one who calls her attention, as she explains:
“For me the mobile phone is just for answering calls”. I don’t even pay attention to the
messages. Sometimes, my son calls my attention: “Mom, you have messages”,
otherwise I wouldn’t even notice them. .. If it were for me, I would always buy those
handsets that enable you only to receive and make calls (laugh)”(46, female, sometimes
uses the internet).
Conclusion
Despite the analyses of the differences according to the age of family members
regarding the use of mobile phones, we also tried to show that socioeconomic status
influence the way young people and old members of the family interact with new media
technologies, especially mobile phones. Economic capital matters in the way these
families use their devices but cultural capital also plays a fundamental role, as can be
observed especially in the simple uses of the devices made by young people.
The cultural capital- especially conveyed by family- also contributes to what is stated by
Rojas et al (2010) as the techno-disposition and the techno-habitus, which means the
dispositions a family have to use media technologies, like handling the mobile phones.
It was a surprise to realize that some young people make really simple use of their
devices. But we also have to keep in mind that most young people in this study clearly
showed the use of the device mainly for the purpose of contact, followed by
entertainment (which also includes listening to music and taking/sending pictures).
When trying to understand why young people have a wider exploration of some of the
applications we have to take into consideration their peer relationship, which is a strong
stimulus for them to learn how to handle these applications once they want to be in
touch and have fun with their peers. Young people are generally the ones who master
and try to convey this techno-knowledge at home, which can be received or not,
according to the disposition of the members of the family.
Nevertheless, there are young people who dedicate little relevance to their mobile
phones, which can either be a reflect of the way their family handle with new
technologies or even a taste/personal question of relevance, once this young people may
have other interests that consider more important at the moment and only uses the
technologies to get to them.
On the other hand, the older members in general do not conceive the mobile phones as a
means of entertainment and are attached to the device as a phone itself and for them it's
hard to disassociate them from the function it was first conceived for, which means
talking. Others, though really in low number, have begun to broaden this view and
accept the phone as a device that goes beyond making and receiving calls.
Also, the incorporation by young people is much more prominent, once they make
references of being with the mobile phone all the time, communicating with friends or
avoiding boredom by listening to music, playing or using other applications. Parents do
not make so many references of using the mobile phone all the time as well as their uses
are much more restricted than the uses of their children. Some parents even try to make
it clear that avoid letting the mobile phone become more incorporated by not using them
or turning them off as soon as they get home.
Besides, through this sample it seems that there was no relation of the parents’ use of
mobile phones with education. One of the hypotheses to be verified was that the higher
the educational level of the parent, the more intense and diversified the use would be.
Through the analysis we could verify that two mothers, one with less than 12 years of
study and the other with a University degree – among nine parents with a University
degree - are the ones who affirm using many of their mobile phones applications. Also,
there is no direct relation with the way /intensity parents use their mobile phones with
the way /intensity their children use their devices.
Based on these observations, in the light of the reflections about economic/cultural
capital and the thoughts of Drotner (2005:188) in which “the contemporary media
culture is characterized by technological convergence” and that mobiles are “part of an
interlaced media ensemble”, we can realize that most of these family members are
completely apart of a convergent use once they present a poor or none
relationship/exchange with other media technologies especially internet, with only few
exceptions. Consequently, they do not take advantages of a more active and inclusive
use of these devices, like downloading and uploading things from their mobile to
internet, participating, creating content and developing more skills.
References
Bourdieu, P. (1984) Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Cambridge,
Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
Cardoso, G., et al. (2007). Portugal Móvel: Utilização do Telemóvel e Transformação
da Vida Social. OberCom.
Cardoso, G., R. Espanha, et al. (2009). E-Generation 2008: Os Usos de media pelas
Crianças e Jovens em Portugal. Lisboa, Obercom.
Caron, A. H. and Caronia, L. (2007). Moving Cultures: Mobile Communication in
Everyday Life. Montréal, McGill-Queen’s University Press.
Drotner, K. (2005). Media on the move: Personalised media and the transformation of
publicness. In S. Livingstone (Ed.), Audiences and Publics: When Cultural Engagement
Matters for the Public Sphere (pp. 187-212). Bristol: Intellect Press.
Erc (2008). Estudo de Recepção dos Meios de Comunicação Social (versão pdf).
Lisboa, Entidade Reguladora da Comunicação Social.
Eurobarometer nº 248 (2008) - Towards a safer use of the Internet for children in the
EU – a parents’ perspective.
Geser, Hans (2004). Towards a Sociology of the Mobile Phone. In: Sociology in
Switzerland: Sociology of the Mobile Phone. Online Publications. Zuerich. Retrieved
from: http://socio.ch/mobile/t_geser1.pdf
Horst, H. (2010) Families. in Ito, M. Hanging out, messing around, and geeking out :
kids living and learning with new media. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur
Foundation Series in Digital Media and Learning. MIT Press.
INE (2009) Inquérito à Utilização de Tecnologias da Informação e da Comunicação
pelas Famílias: Indivíduos dos 10 aos 15 anos. Lisboa.
Jouët, Josiane and Pasquier, Dominique (1999) Youth and screen culture. Réseaux, 7
(1): 31-58.
Livingstone, S., and Helsper, E. J. (2007) Gradations in digital inclusion: Children,
young people and the digital divide. New Media & Society, 9: 671-696.
Nogueira, C. M. M.; Nogueira, M. A sociologia de Pierre Bourdieu: limites e
contribuições. Educação & Sociedade. Revista Quadrienal de Ciência da Educação, n.
78, Abr/2002, p. 15-36.
Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2006). Adolescents' internet use: Testing the
"Disappearing digital divide" versus the "Emerging digital differentiation" approach.
Poetics, 34(4-5), 293-305.
Rojas, Viviana, Straubhaar, Joseph, et al. (2010). Chapter 10. Communities, cultural
capital and digital inclusion: Ten years of tracking techno-dispositions.
Silverstone, R.; Hirsch, E.; Morley, D. (1992) Information and communication
technologies and the moral economy of the household in Silverstone, R.; Hirsch, E.
Consuming Technologies: Media and information in domestic spaces. Routledge.