A Critical Discourse Analysis of the ICT Strategies of the Center for Innovation, Provincial Government of the Western Cape

A Critical Discourse Analysis of the ICT Strategies
of the Center for Innovation, Provincial Government
of the Western Cape

Steve Vosloo
University of Cape Town
South Africa

Session 4b, 19 May 2010 IST-Africa 2010

Motivation, problem area

Enter ICTs → tools to support development (ICT4D)
• Recurrent themes:
– Uncriticality (not enough research)
– Causality between ICTs and development (without evidence)
– Disconnect between discourse (ICT4D) and implementation (failure)
– Technological determinism (access = development)
– “Leapfrog”



“governmental, political and technological attempts that focus
almost exclusively on providing access to digital
communication technologies … expect 'development'
naturally to flow from that” (Roode et al., 2004)



• SA in support of ICT4D, information society, knowledge
economy, e.g. National e-Strategy (2007) and provincial
strategies, policies, frameworks, etc.
• This discourse of ICT4D is very important
• “Technocentric approach” (technological determinism)
shown to be the cause of many ICT4D failures
• ICT4D policies need to be exposed to critical discourse
analysis



CDA is based on “assumptions of disharmony, conflict, and
power differentials between populations and groups, and on
the assumption that language use reflects, reproduces, and
changes these social phenomena” (Frantz, 2003)


Research Objectives

• Considering key ICT strategic documents, were there
invalid claims or “distortions” in the texts?
• If yes, what were these distortions?
• Remember: Distortions decrease the chance of successful
implementation


Research approach, Methodology

• Applied to:
– 5 strategic documents of the Centre for e-Innovation, PGWC:
background, framework, strategy and planning
– CeI driving e-govt and information society in the WC, becoming a
“change agent” to achieve developmental goals through ICTs
– Documents published April 2004 to January 2006
• Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action (1984) reveals
underlying assumptions and ideologies in texts
• Expose distortions, but also help undistort
• Communication in an “ideal speech situation” meets four
validity claims



Claim Question If valid If invalid

Truth Is the discourse Knowledge Misrepresentation
true?

Clarity Is the discourse Comprehension Confusion
clear or does it
use jargon that is
not understood?

Sincerity Is there a hidden Trust False assurances
agenda in the
discourse?

Legitimacy What is Consent Illegitimacy
assumed in the
discourse?



• Operationalised by Cukier et al. (2004, 2003)
• Guiding questions by Cukier et al. (2004, 2003) and Stahl et
al. (2005)
• 97 pages to analyse
• Needed second pass through analysis to regroup/redefine
claims


Major Outcomes/Results

Truth: Argumentation and evidence
• What is said about the technology?
• Are the issues and options clearly defined?
• What costs (financial and claimed negative effects) and benefits
(claimed positive effects) have been identified and assessed?
• What evidence has been provided to support these arguments?
• Has the relevant information been communicated without
distortion or omission?
• Are there ideological claims which are unexamined?



Truth
Level 2 (Truth) No. of claims

Description 250

Benefit 231

Disadvantage 3

Evidence 10

Distortion 29

Omission 13

Faulty analogy/logic/cause 5

Problem 84

Ideology 15

Total 640



Sincerity: Metaphors and descriptors
• Are metaphors used, e.g. ICT revolution?
• Do metaphors and connotative words promote or suppress
understanding?
• Do metaphors and connotative words create false assurances?

• Positive associations: new, innovative, pioneering
• Negative associations: expensive, insufficient



Sincerity
• ICT as “enabler” (28 times)
• ICT plays a “critical role” (42 times)
• “Participation” (5 times)

“[T]he ICT revolution can provide powerful new tools both for
addressing people's basic needs and for enriching the lives
of poor people and communities in unprecedented ways”
[AR1]



Clarity
• Is there use of jargon?
• Are there terms that are not explained?
• Is there evidence of obfuscation?

• Difficult standard to apply (Cukier et al., 2003)
• Fallacy of jargon (Michalos, 1986) occurs when a claim is made
through technical or uncommon terms that make it seem more
important or valuable than what it is, e.g. “The Centre for e-
Innovation has the digital ecosystem of the entire Province as its
concern” [AR1]



Legitimacy: How is it achieved? In whose interests?
• Who is speaking, who is silent, what are their interests?
“Selective silence” (Cukier et al., 2004)
• What is privileged? What is not said about the technology?
• What is assumed or implied?
• How are the decisions legitimised?
• Who is cited, who is not?



Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 No. of claims Total

Legitimacy Assumption (General) 3 54

ICTs have inherent value 1

Technological determinism 30

Techno-optimism 20

Legitimation Government developmental 11 53
strategies

Other means of legitimation 24

Other PGWC documents 18

Non-speaker 8 8

Speaker 7 7

Session 4b, Total 2010
19 May IST-Africa 2010 122


Legitimacy
• Example of technological determinism:
“The digital world is a world united by one language of ones
and zeros; a world where people across continents (or
across the passageway) share information with one another
and work together to build ideas and projects. Through
collaboration, more voluminous and accurate information is
generated and accumulated, and distributed in a twinkling
to an audience that understands exactly what was said.
This in turn allows the recipients of the information to use it
for their own purposes, to create new ideas and redistribute
them. The result is progress.” [AR1]



Legitimacy
• Example of techno-optimism:
“production in the knowledge economy can be fine-tuned in
ways heretofore undreamed of” [AR1]


Discussion

• Inherited distortions:
– Global → national → provincial → local
– ICTs have served sustainable development → WSIS/MDGs →
ASGiSA
– CeI forced to promulgate these distortions
• CeI itself:
– Battle for budget allocation
– Self-justification
– The “sell” is sometimes necessary (but could be more balanced)
• Also undistorted claims:
– Holistic view: relevant content, training and partnerships
– ICTs alone cannot solve all problems


Conclusion and outlook

• Balanced viewpoints (minority)
• Yes, distortions (majority)
• Need more balance
• Ask questions:
– Do ICTs serve developmental needs? Not How do ICTs serve ...?
– Real costs of ICTs?
– ROI?
• A “critical perspective may reduce the chances of
technology being oversold, and thereby, ironically, enhance
its diffusion” (Cukier et al., 2003)


Questions

• Has anything changed since 2006?
• Have policies and strategies matured?
• Swapping old distortions for new ones?
• What is todays “leapfrogging”?
• Watch Kentaro Toyama's talk at TEDx Tokyo on the "myth
of scale" http://is.gd/ccEWb


Credits

Steve Vosloo: stevevosloo@gmail.com
Dr Wallace Chigona: wallace.chigona@uct.ac.za

Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0


A Critical Discourse Analysis of the ICT Strategies of the Center for Innovation, Provincial Government of the Western Cape

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

Destacado

Destacado (20)

Similar a A Critical Discourse Analysis of the ICT Strategies of the Center for Innovation, Provincial Government of the Western Cape

Similar a A Critical Discourse Analysis of the ICT Strategies of the Center for Innovation, Provincial Government of the Western Cape (20)

Más de Steve Vosloo

Más de Steve Vosloo (15)

Último

Último (20)

A Critical Discourse Analysis of the ICT Strategies of the Center for Innovation, Provincial Government of the Western Cape