Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
The deeply embedded nature of dominant assumptions creates an accepted language and way of thinking about ICT, leaving little space for alternative perspectives and ideologies. Policy directions link information technology, the information economy, innovation, competition and global markets. Innovation and information and communications technology constructs a particular application of innovation and directs funding accordingly. Given that policy is about how we categorise, about naming and naming shapes action, the question is what lenses do policy makers use to make choices in their synthesis of social, political and economic life? Using the Australian Information Communications and Technology (ICT) policy as a case study, this article will argue that policy reflects the economic, social and political ideologies of the decision makers. Despite opportunities for input into policy multiple perspectives are limited. Specifically the article looks at claims around consultation, the assumption that the information economy will benefit all Australians, the development of framework conditions for the information economy and the role of government.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Helen Bound (2006) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: