Greetings,

I have learned through the course of this structured discussion that moving
too quickly means losing the opportunity to learn. As the participation of
the list grows, so too will the learning. The implications for community
health to participate in the knowledge society can inform other sectors with
whom we work to address the broad determinants of health.

The players on Click4hp are from many walks of life, geographic locations,
and  areas of interest. What we all have in common is a curiosity to
understand the implications of information and communication technologies
for achieving the goals of our work.

Peggy Shultz wrote:
> I think that is the challenge -
>that we  must figure out how to use this technology with its potential -
>rather than being swept along by it.  Sam Lafranco's work helps to bring
>focus to this "transforming" capacity through the use of virtual space.  The
>technology can amplify the opportunity or it can reflect the dysfunctional
>patterns.  Health promoters will, live, work and communicate in the virtual
>and real world.

In a recent workshop delivered for CIDA at INET96 in Montreal, Sam Lanfranco
reitierated the use of a new metaphor for the use of information and
communication technology (ICT).

A complimentary metaphor to the "Information Highway" as a sort of faster
and cheaper courier service, is the metaphor of the virtual workspace.

The highway metaphor gives support to the economic models of competition,
with the race going to those quickest to incorporate ICT into production. By
focusing on the use of the virtual workspace, we can think through our
objectives as health promoters, without reacting to the pressures of being
"swept along by it".

In our efforts to energize and excite the health promotion community in
Canada about the opportunities of combining the virtual workspace with the
literal workspace to accomplish our work, we have perhaps failed in our
attempt to generate a clear understanding of what is meant by the coming
together of the virtual and literal workspaces. In my experience it is the
coming together of the literal and the virtual that consititues what is "real".

As Sam Lanfranco writes:
"The metaphor of the virtual workspace is much richer. It points to
significantly reduced literal obstacles to group activity, access to
information, and the ability to be heard. It does not reduce the importance
of power imbalances per se, but by reducing technical obstacles, it leaves
more naked those obatacles  based on power."

Confusion exists equating the virtual with the unreal. The meaningful
distinction exists between the literal and virtual - not the virtual and the
"real".

The literal workspace has a tangible presence in time and space. The virtual
workspace, although not tangible in time and space, is no less real. In our
understanding of the psyche, the subconscience is a virtual reality, one
which only gained formal legitimacy in the industrial world during the past
century. Religion is a 'virtual' reality. Social process is conducted across
the literal-virtual landscape.

How we use the electronic venue to further our work will not be determined
by the technology. The technology will change the nature of the playing
field upon which we engage in social process and it will impact on the rules
of the game (equity in collaborative ventures, increased accountability,
transparency). How social process is governed is a result of social process,
not technology. The invention of the printing press did not ensure democracy
but it did make it more possible.


>AND, then there is the question of access and equity in cyberspace...this is
>not assured and I will end here.

In working with poor and marginalized communities in Ontario I have quickly
learned not to assume they do not have access to the technology. I am not
waiting for someone else to address this issue. In the course of my work I
address this issue by making machines available to those who want access. In
joining together with others in the women's community in Canada, we have
seen faster and more equitable access to more information and the ability to
support each other than ever before. Communities rich enough to overcome the
barriers of access by other means seem slower to undertake serious
consideration of using the technology for their own socio-economic persuits.
Looking to developing nations and their capapcity to leap frog toward
innovative applications of information and communication technologies
exemplifies this point.

In meeting and talking with groups from all over Canada last weekend at the
Getting Online conference it was very evident the technology was being used
by groups one might assume to be further marginalized by its increasing use
(women, seniors, aboriginal groups, among others). They are claiming and
settling their space.

I hope this helps to clarify the concepts of literal and virtual, to place
in context the concept of real, and to address issues of access.

Liz Rykert
<[log in to unmask]>