When reading Jennifer Spiegel's commentary on Marc Prensky's article Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants, my sociological imagination pushed me to think beyond whether students simply "know" technology to asking broader questions about power: who benefits from benefits from particular ways of engaging with technology. While Prensky's concept of the "digital native" recognizes that many young people have grown up immersed in technology, I ultimately align more closely with Spiegel's critique because technological experiences are far more complex than age alone can explain.
From a sociological perspective, technological literacy is socially constructed and shaped by factors such as access, socioeconomic statis, educational opportunities, and cultural capital. Simply growing up around technology does not automatically produce critical technology literacy. As a teacher, I think it can be easy to assume students who spend significant amounts of time online are naturally skilled users of technology. However, comfort with devices or social media does not necessarily mean students know how to evaluate information, ideally misinformation, or think critically about the systems in which they participate.
I also find the terminology itself concerning. Labeling theory suggests that categories can shape expectations and reinforce assumptions about people's abilities and identities. With this, labels carry power, and terms such as "digital native" and "digital immigrant" can easily be misunderstood and unintentionally create deficit perspectives. "Digital native" can suggest that young people already possess technological expertise and therefore to not require support, while "digital immigrant" frames others as outsiders permanently trying to catch up. The immigrant analogy feels limiting because it borrows language associated with migration and displacement in a way that does not fully fit this context. "Digital participants" may better capture that technological understanding exists on a continuum.
What stood out to me most was considering who benefits from different forms of technological engagement. The dominance of "digital socialites," individuals who primarily use technology for social interaction and content consumption, does not simply shape behavior; it serves the interest of producers who rely on attention and engagement. Children are nor creating these systems or fully understanding the incentives behind them, yet they are entering environments intentionally designed to maximize time spent online. While technology can create opportunities for connection and creativity, these systems can affect children's well-being through increased social comparison, anxiety, shortened attention spans, and reduced opportunities for meaningful face-to-face interactions.
Rather than viewing these outcomes as individual shortcomings, I think it is important to recognize the broader social structures and power dynamics shaping users' experiences. The Forbes (2026) billionaire list reported a record of 3,428 billionaires with a combined wealth of $20.1 trillion, driven heavily by AI expansion and technology markets. The wealthiest individuals on the list were overwhelmingly connected to social media and technology. Elon Musk ranked the highest, with profits coming from ownership of Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI. Larry Page and Sergey Brin follow closely behind, attributing their wealth to the success of Google and Alphabet. Jeff Bezos built his fortune through Amazon, while Mark Zuckerberg's wealth originates from Meta and other major social media platforms. While many young people become increasingly immersed in digital environments, the largest economic rewards continue to accrue to those who control the systems themselves.
References
Forbes. (2026, March 10). Forbes’ 40th annual world’s billionaires list: Elon Musk is world’s richest person ever recorded. Forbes billionaires report
Spiegel, J. (2021). Prensky revisited: Is the term “digital native” still applicable to today’s learner? English Leadership Quarterly, 44(2), 12–15.
Stella, I love that you ponder who benefits from how we engage with technology. I feel like this piece is missing from the two works we read. I also agree with you that age is not enough to predict what you know about technology or how you are able to engage with it. I also appreciate how you recognize that social structures and power dynamic influence our access, skills, and connection to technology. Thank you for your insights!
ReplyDelete