This website uses cookies for anonymised analytics and for account authentication. See our privacy and cookies policies for more information.

 




Supporting Scotland's vibrant voluntary sector

Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations

The Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations is the membership organisation for Scotland's charities, voluntary organisations and social enterprises. Charity registered in Scotland SC003558. Registered office Caledonian Exchange, 19A Canning Street, Edinburgh EH3 8EG.

Is Digital Inclusion just a sticking plaster for deeper inequities? 

In recent weeks, I’ve been soaking up the sunshine and logging steps for our workplace step count challenge, all the while engaging in some really interesting walk-and-talks with staff and volunteers from charities, community groups, and social enterprises across Scotland. We’ve been digging into the wave of digital inclusion reports and strategies that have been released in the last six months and discussing what this means for third sector orgs in Scotland. Once we get by the issues about national insurance hikes, AI acceleration, and the fact that many organisations are flying blind without a clear digital inclusion plan, one unexpected issue keeps popping up from these conversations, that the third sector is nothing more than a sticking plaster for big societal issues. They’re doing awesome work to ease the struggle, but they’re not equipped to tackle the root causes and here’s the thing, government reports and national strategies seem to be stuck in the same loop.  Taking a pragmatic approach may be effective for tackling problems directly, but it falls short when it only addresses symptoms without tackling core issues. 

Before the pandemic, I was once a former lecturer in Community Learning and Development at the University of Glasgow, so this got me thinking about things said afterwards through a theoretical lens as to why this may be the case, drawing from people like Antonio Gramsci's cultural hegemony or Pierre Bourdieu who talks a about cultural capital, wondering is it time that we start thinking about critical digital pedagogies to address this sticking plaster approach and what that means for digital inclusion long term.   

Why We Need Critical Digital Pedagogy 

So, let’s set the scene and talk about what is critical digital pedagogy and why we need it going forward. CDP is a way of teaching and learning that doesn’t just show people how to use tech but encourages them to question it, how it’s built, who controls it, and how it shapes our lives. Think of it as empowering people to not only navigate apps but also challenge the systems behind them, like why certain platforms dominate or how data is used. If we weave this into our daily work, whether in community settings, education, or youth work programmes means shifting from “here’s how to use Zoom” to “let’s explore who owns Zoom, what they do with your data, and how that affects you.” It’s about building digital skills with critical thinking, so people can shape the digital world, not just live in it. 

The Grip of Cultural Hegemony 

Gramsci’s concept of cultural hegemony highlights how dominant groups maintain power by shaping cultural norms and institutions. In the digital realm, big tech companies wield this power through their control over platforms, devices, and infrastructure. Digital inclusion strategies, such as those outlined in Scotland’s Roadmap for Digital Inclusion and the UK Government Digital Inclusion Action Plan 2025, aim to enhance access, skills, and confidence. Yet, these initiatives often rely on the very ecosystems controlled by tech corporations, think proprietary operating systems, mainstream devices, and internet services. 

This reliance creates an inclusion-exclusion paradox. While device donation schemes and connectivity improvements expand access, they embed users deeper into corporate frameworks, potentially reinforcing big tech’s dominance. For instance, the Lloyds Bank Consumer Digital Index 2024 notes that only 3% of people remain offline, signalling widespread dependence on these platforms.  

Grassroots efforts by the third sector provide resources but risk co-optation, aligning local initiatives with corporate interests rather than challenging systemic power structures. 

Cultural Capital and Digital Inequalities 

Pierre Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital refers to the non-economic resources such as knowledge, skills, and social connections that enable individuals to navigate and succeed in societal systems. In the context of digital inclusion, cultural capital shapes who can effectively engage with the digital world. Those with greater access to education, income, or social networks are better equipped to acquire devices, reliable internet, and the digital literacy needed to thrive online. For instance, the UK Government Digital Inclusion Action Plan 2025 highlights that low-income households, older adults, and people with disabilities often lack these resources, making them more likely to face digital exclusion. Similarly, the Adults’ Media Use and Attitudes Report 2024 shows that wealthier households (AB groups) possess the confidence and skills to leverage digital tools, while poorer households (DE groups) struggle. Without addressing these disparities in cultural capital, digital inclusion efforts may only scratch the surface, leaving structural inequalities intact and limiting opportunities for marginalised groups to fully participate in the digital age. The Scottish Minimum Digital Living Standard Interim Report 2025 highlights the need for a holistic combination of devices, services, and skills, yet incorporating critical digital pedagogy is essential to ensure these efforts empower rather than entrench existing inequalities. 

The Third Sector’s Role Mitigation Over Transformation 

So now we come to the sticking plaster effect i.e. the third sector’s efforts in digital inclusion, while vital, often focus on mitigating symptoms rather than addressing the root causes of digital poverty and exclusion. Device donation schemes, connectivity subsidies, and digital skills workshops provide immediate relief but operate within the constraints of existing technological and economic systems. Jürgen Habermas’s theory of communicative action suggests that true societal change requires open, rational discourse that challenges systemic distortions, yet third-sector initiatives rarely have the resources or mandate to engage in such structural critique. Similarly, Paulo Freire’s pedagogy of the oppressed advocates for education that liberates through critical consciousness, but many digital inclusion programmes prioritise functional skills over transformative awareness. For example, the UK Government Digital Inclusion Action Plan 2025 emphasises partnerships with corporations, which, while practical, risk co-optation by aligning with the interests of tech companies rather than questioning their dominance. The SCVO Roadmap for Digital Inclusion recognises the link between digital exclusion and poverty, and proposes solutions like cross-sector collaboration, which focus on working within existing systems to address these challenges and while this mitigation focused approach is necessary. it still underscores the need for broader strategies that confront the structural inequalities perpetuating digital poverty. 

Pathways to Transformative Inclusion 

Emerging initiatives offer glimpses of more transformative approaches. The National Youth Agency Digital Youth Work Standards advocate for youth-led programmes, encouraging young people to shape their digital experiences and address issues like online safety. This aligns with critical digital pedagogy, creating space for young people to question platform design or data practices.   

The SCVO Roadmap for Digital Inclusion recognises that eradicating digital exclusion requires addressing poverty, calling for evidence-based interventions and community-driven solutions.  

In this context by making digital inclusion everybody’s responsibility could lay the groundwork for alternative digital ecosystems, particularly if paired with pedagogical approaches that empower communities to critically engage with technology. 

Michel Foucault’s concept of power-knowledge further illuminates this need, suggesting that challenging digital exclusion requires disrupting the knowledge systems embedded in corporate platforms through community-led, participatory frameworks. 

Addressing the elephant in the room  

Digital inclusion is an ongoing challenge that demands more than access and skills. Critical digital pedagogy offers a pathway to empower individuals to question and reshape the digital world. By addressing big tech’s hegemonic control, unequal access to cultural capital, and the third sector’s mitigation-focused approach efforts should prioritise community driven infrastructures, rigorous evaluation of long-term impacts, and education that fosters critical consciousness of the people.  
 

Last modified on 22 July 2025