Every 10 years, the U.S. Census Bureau undertakes a massive effort to count every person living in the United States. Because African Americans are among the groups of people who have historically been undercounted, and because an undercount can deprive communities of political representation as well as urgently needed resources, achieving a fair and accurate count in the 2020 Census is one of the most important civil rights issues facing Black America. That is why The Leadership Conference Education Fund has been collaborating with a broad network of civil and human rights advocates, policy experts, and service providers to call attention to the importance of the census and to sound an alarm about a potential disaster in the making.

The Constitution requires a complete population count, which plays a major role in the distribution of political power in the United States. The 2020 Census will determine how many seats each state has in the U.S. House of Representatives for the next 10 years. In addition, census data will be used by state and local officials to draw the lines for congressional districts as well as state legislative and local election districts. There’s a lot at stake in having everyone counted.

Census data are also used to monitor compliance with civil rights protections like those in the Voting Rights Act, and to guide their enforcement. After the Supreme Court’s Brown v Board of Education decision, for example, census data helped shape school desegregation efforts. The enforcement of voting rights and other civil rights protections are already at risk in our current political climate. Failure to collect accurate demographic information in the 2020 Census can only make things worse.

The economic well-being of African-American individuals and communities is also at risk because census data are used to steer more than $600 billion every year in federal spending on programs ranging from economic development to housing, education, transportation, and health care. In addition, state and local governments and social service agencies use census data to identify where needs are greatest. Private companies rely on census data to decide where to invest job-creating dollars. Without good data guiding all these decisions, a great deal of money will be wasted over the next 10 years, and many people’s needs will be left unmet.

The new technologies and strategies being put in place for the 2020 Census have the potential to address many challenges to ensuring a more accurate count. The new internet response option could make participation easier than ever before, saving time, money, and paperwork. Targeted digital advertising could help reach hard-to-count communities, including African Americans, Latinos, and younger adults, who rely more on mobile devices for their internet access.

But the new online option will not be a “silver bullet.” We cannot carry out a “digital age” census without addressing the digital divide. According to one study, 78 percent of non-Hispanic Black Americans use the internet, compared with 85 percent of whites and 84 percent of adults overall.

There are also regional differences, with greater access to high-speed internet in the Northeast and West than in the South. We also need to ensure that completing the questionnaire on a smartphone is just as easy as doing so on a laptop or desktop computer. Identifying these problems and designing and testing solutions requires commitment, investment, and time.

These opportunities and risks are examined in-depth in “Counting Everyone in the Digital Age,” a report published by The Leadership Conference Education Fund and the Georgetown Center on Poverty and Inequality.

In theory, maximizing the number of people who participate online will free up more resources to focus “get out the count” efforts on those who do not initially respond. But people in vulnerable communities, especially those who feel targeted by or distrust the government in the current political climate, may not trust the new technologies or may believe that their answers will be used against them or their loved ones. And there are other security considerations; people with less secure internet access are more vulnerable to hackers and malware that might target census operations.

All these potential problems are worsened by a severe crisis of underfunding for the 2020 Census. The Census Bureau spends most of the decade preparing for this massive undertaking. Beginning a few years before the actual count, the bureau needs a steady increase in funding to move from research and testing to planning, development and preparation—and then implementation. However, that has not happened yet for the 2020 Census. Here's a useful comparison:

Congress’ failure to pass appropriations bills on time for Fiscal Years 2017 and 2018, and the Trump administration’s woefully inadequate original funding request for FY 2018, has added significant risk to census preparations. This means that when the Census Bureau conducts this year’s crucial “dress rehearsal,” which is the only integrated evaluation of all operations and IT systems before the 2020 Census, it will be hundreds of millions of dollars short of what it needs to rigorously test the new IT infrastructure. Moreover, the bureau has lowered the projected online response rate for the 2020 Census to 41 percent.  The inaction of our elected officials to adequately fund census preparations could lead to an expensive and damaging disaster, one whose impact would almost certainly fall hardest on the most vulnerable communities, including African Americans.

These critical, time-sensitive census funding and planning issues must be addressed now to ensure a fair and accurate census in 2020. The Leadership Conference is working with the National Urban League, the NAACP and our other coalition partners to ensure that no one is left out of the 2020 Census. Together, we are mobilizing and engaging the civil and human rights coalition on critical, time-sensitive issues now to ensure that the Census Bureau has the resources it needs. We have a once in a decade chance to get it right, and we will live with the consequences for years to come.

The internet is at the core of every aspect of modern society, yet there are a disproportionate number of communities of color who find themselves on the wrong side of the digital divide.

The internet is the bridge to academic achievement, applying for and excelling in many types of jobs, managing finances and participating fully in the civic life of our nation. For the millions of Americans—especially those living in marginalized communities—who work to provide a brighter future for themselves and their families, lack of access to high-speed internet shouldn’t put success out of reach. But the truth is it does—and we have to change that. 

Twenty-five percent of Americans don’t have broadband access at home. The percentage increases for some, depending on their age, ethnicity and income. Compared to white households, Black and Hispanic households have lower rates of both wired and wireless broadband adoption, according to 2017 U.S. Census Bureau data.

Lack of internet access hits young people the hardest.  A Pew Research Center analysis found that approximately five million households with school-age children in the U.S. do not have high-speed internet service at home, with a disproportionate amount consisting of Black and Hispanic low-income households. This makes it hard for students to complete homework assignments or projects, and as more schools integrate internet-based learning into their curriculum, the gap increases.

Bridging the digital divide requires cross-sector investment and partnership.  Companies like ours, which cover some of the largest urban markets across the country, have a unique role in pushing innovation and finding solutions to these challenges.

With this in mind, Charter has invested $25 billion in infrastructure and technology, providing faster and better broadband to more communities since 2014.  Over the next few years, we’ll continue to extend the reach of our network in both rural and urban areas.

We also recognize that we don’t just need to ensure broadband availability — we need to do our part to foster broadband adoption.

That’s why we created the Spectrum Internet Assist Program, which offers faster, low-cost internet to eligible low-income families and seniors.  Our goal is to empower them to access information about their communities, take classes, do homework and apply for jobs.

We also understand the need to make broadband relevant to people of all backgrounds and income groups and provide the skills they need to succeed in today’s digital economy.  It’s why we launched the Spectrum Digital Education Grant Program, which will provide $1 million in digital education grants to support non-profit organizations that educate and train community members on critical internet skills that can be used to improve their lives.

We are proud of our partnership with the National Urban League, which has fought for decades to advance racial and economic justice. Building on its work, as well as collaborating with other telecommunications and technology companies, grassroots organizations and government entities, will be key to meeting needs and closing the digital divide.

Only together will we power the digital revolution that will strengthen our national economy and keep us competitive with the world.

High-speed Internet... social media... broadband... mobile apps... online...e-commerce... smartphones... digital streaming... selfies... GPS systems.

These words were not part of the national vocabulary 50 years ago.

Back in 1968, the digital revolution that now permeates the lives of most Americans was unimaginable.  Today, giving all Americans full access to the benefits of the Internet is an essential part of delivering on Dr. Martin Luther King's still unrealized vision of a "beloved community" founded on economic and social justice.

To realize Dr. King's vision in modern America, we need to pursue the kind of digital inclusion that will allow Black Americans, and all U.S. citizens, to be equal players in the digital economy.  One obvious priority is to close the much-discussed "digital divide" that separates families who enjoy high-speed Internet connections at home from those who don't.

David L. Cohen visiting with students

In 21st Century America, homes without Internet connections are the digital equivalent of homes without electricity or running water.  According to the most recent research, more than 25 percent of American households are living without this opportunity despite three quarters of these families living in homes where the broadband plant has been built out to their neighborhoods.  Those households are overwhelmingly low-income and disproportionately include people of color.  In fact, in households making less than $30,000 a year nearly 50 percent (47%) nationwide do not have an Internet connection.

In a cruel irony of the digital divide, Internet technology that could help low-income families move ahead is actually pushing them further behind due to non-adoption.  As a leader in the media and technology industry, this situation is intolerable to Comcast NBCUniversal.

In 2011, we created Internet Essentials, which is now the nation's most comprehensive and successful low-income broadband adaption program.  Through June 2017, Internet Essentials has connected more than four million people in one million households across the country, and more than 80 percent of our Internet Essentials customers are people of color.

Through the program, low-income households are eligible to receive a high-speed Internet connection for $9.95 a month along with in-home WiFi and access to more than 19 million Xfinity WiFi hotspots out of the home for 40 hours per month at no extra cost.  Internet Essentials customers also have the option of purchasing an Internet-ready computer for $150.  As all the research demonstrates that it is the bucket of digital literacy and digital relevance issues that is the most substantial barrier to broadband adoption; we support free digital literacy training in print, in person, and online, in English or Spanish, so people can make full use of the Internet through a network of more than 9,000 partners, like the National Urban League.

By way of example, through support from the Comcast Foundation, Urban League Affiliates in Atlanta, Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, Sacramento, Seattle, Springfield, and West Palm Beach are providing digital literacy training for families in cities across the country.

We are also proud to partner with nonprofits encouraging young African Americans with an interest in technology to take part in the fast-expanding digital economy.  For example, In Chicago, we have partnered with Black Tech Mecca (BTM) to ensure African Americans are full participants in the city's technology sector.  We are currently working with BTM to apply the lessons learned in Chicago in our hometown of Philadelphia.

In Miami, we admire and support the work of Code Fever, which trains students 13 to 21 years old to code and eventually launch their own tech startups. These kids will enter a tech arena already strengthened by promising black-owned startups.  To encourage these entrepreneurs, Comcast Ventures also launched a $20 million venture capital fund that has partnered with 80 minority-owned startups.

I offer these examples by way of expressing my confidence that the state of Black America and the state of the digital revolution share an intertwined and promising future.  That future, of course, depends on continued support to improve digital inclusion in a way that is equitable.  This type of inclusion must be supported by the diversity and inclusion practices of tech companies. Diversity and inclusion are long-standing priorities at Comcast NBCUniversal—deeply rooted in our desire to do the right thing from a moral perspective and the right thing for the future growth of our company.

Comcast NBCUniversal is now regarded as a national leader in diversity and inclusion, and was ranked  #1 by Fortune Magazine in its annual 100 Best Workplaces for Diversity list.  This makes us proud—but not complacent.  Our diversity and inclusion goals for the future are set ambitiously high. They will not be easy to reach, but we are confident that every step ahead will make us a stronger company and help bring us all closer to a world where we can live together in Dr. King's "beloved community."

While we are living in a fast-paced, digitally-connected, technologically-innovative era, America is on the verge of becoming a more divided nation. Our society is characterized by echo chambers and connectivity cliques where communities of color are, once again, on the wrong side of the opportunities divide. There are, however, rays of hope; and with just a few, intentional steps, we can close many persistent divides with: (1) ubiquitous access to affordable broadband; (2) a free and open internet; and (3) diversity in media.  

Access to Affordable Broadband

Broadband enables businesses and residents to transition from surviving to thriving by connecting them to schools, healthcare providers, government, and other critical services. Yet, a disproportionate number of communities of color are unable to get and stay connected. Around half of African-American households earning less than $30,000 per year have access to broadband at home, while 80% of Fortune 500 companies use online-only job applications, 94% of school districts serving low-income populations report that some of their teachers assign internet-based homework, and 45 states have online-only applications for at least one of the five main state-administered public assistance programs. The bottom line is this: Access to broadband is essential in the 21st century and it is even more critical for communities of color.

The FCC’s Lifeline program can help fill the gap. Modernized in 2016, this program relieves millions of Americans on tight budgets from having to choose between their next meal or a telephone connection. But this program is under attack. The current Administration has proposed rolling back the ability of broadband providers to now enter the program, telling more than 70% of consumers that they cannot use their preferred voice provider and severely capping the program even though the need is growing. Those who could benefit from internet connectivity the most will be denied a choice, and in some cases, denied service altogether.  

Free and Open Internet  

The internet is one of the most inclusive, enabling, and empowering platforms of our time; it is fertile ground for innovative ideas, diverse points of view, and new business models. Like the wide area telephone lines in the Civil Rights era, the internet has been utilized to shed light on stories of injustices and inequities. From Ferguson, Missouri to North Charleston, South Carolina, cell phones and social media have provided a platform and a voice that traditional media outlets consistently ignore, and it has leveled the playing field for African-American media pioneers. Flourishing podcasts such as Pod Save the People and web series like Awkward Black Girl (now the cultural phenomenon Insecure on HBO) are success stories because of the internet’s openness.

But the protections that enabled these successes will soon be gone. This past December, the FCC majority repealed the 2015 Open Internet Order. Otherwise known as Net Neutrality, this action means there will be no rules preventing broadband providers from charging exorbitant fees to emerging startups and web series to access their consumers online; no prohibitions against slowing down content, or blocking ads, and what is even more notable, there will soon be no expert agency or “cop on the beat” to protect you if you are harmed. The ability to report injustice and organize to protest against it could be threatened, limiting activism, stunting innovation, and leaving already vulnerable communities at grave risk.

Diversity in Media Ownership

Localism, viewpoint diversity and competition are bedrock principles of our national media policy and our democracy. Major mergers and acquisitions in the telecommunications and media industries, compounded by regulatory inaction, can create substantial barriers for market entry and discourage the growth of diverse voices.

Currently, racial and/or ethnic minorities hold most of the voting interests in approximately six percent of full-power commercial TV licenses and just over eight percent of commercial radio licenses. In 2016, I pushed for action to increase diversity and independent programming by eliminating barriers that inhibit their growth and limit diversity in the video marketplace. Alas, the FCC majority has refused to act. In fact, they are perpetuating the problem.  Last year, they reinstituted a loophole known as the “UHF Discount” and by reinstating this provision, a single broadcaster can essentially now reach over 70% of U.S. television households—violating clear, longstanding Congressional limits.  

Addressing the lack of media ownership and other opportunities in the telecommunications space will take a multi-pronged approach that includes pilot incubator programs, the reinstatement of a Tax Certificate Program and objective studies that acknowledge, not ignore, marketplace and regulatory disparities and barriers to entry. As an example, a properly instituted incubation program can lend financial, programming, or technical support to smaller entities and increase the number of diverse holdings. In fact, when the FCC had a Tax Certificate Program, minority ownership increased from 40 of 8,500 U.S. radio and television stations to 288 radio stations and 43 television stations by the time the program ended in 1995. Congressman Butterfield’s Expanding Broadcast Ownership Opportunities Act of 2017 is most needed, and any program or legislation that creates incentives and opportunities to increase diversity in media ownership are steps in the right direction.  

Conclusion

Technology and telecommunications platforms are the greatest equalizers of our time – but that only holds true if everyone has access. Smart, targeted, and inclusive policies can narrow or even eliminate every single critical divide that exists in our nation today. By tearing down entrenched regulatory barriers and instituting innovative rules, policies and laws, we enable communities of color to realize their fullest potential. We can in fact overcome, and an excellent start is engaging in the fight for digital equality.

As the country remains focused on the ways in which Russia interfered with the integrity of the recent 2016 election, we must not forget to focus equal attention to the ongoing threat of voter suppression.  Voter suppression and ongoing voting discrimination stand as grave threats to American democracy.  Across the country, we are witnessing state and local officials take action to make it harder for African Americans and other minority communities to vote. From restrictive voter ID requirements to purges of the registration rolls, and from racial gerrymandering to the disenfranchisement of people with criminal histories, officials in some states are working hard to restrict access to the franchise for African Americans and other minority communities.  Through community vigilance and impact litigation, we can push back against voter suppression. 

In 2013, the Supreme Court issued a ruling in Shelby County, Alabama v. Holder that proved to be a game changer.  In that decision, the Court gutted a core provision of the Voting Rights Act known as the Section 5 preclearance provision.  This provision required states and localities with long and egregious records of voting discrimination to obtain federal review of voting changes before they could be implemented. That provision had blocked hundreds of discriminatory laws and policies, preventing them from ever being implemented.  However, following the ruling, states and localities have moved forward at lightning speed with new restrictions that limit access to the ballot box.

In the Court’s ruling, Justice Roberts noted that “things have changed dramatically” across the country and that “(b)latantly discriminatory evasions of federal decrees are rare.”  However, Justice Roberts’ view of the voting rights landscape does not comport with political reality.

Take Texas, for example. Hours after the Shelby ruling, Texas announced that it was implementing a restrictive photo identification law for voters. Under Texas’ scheme, a conceal-and-carry permit qualified as an acceptable form of voter ID, but a student ID did not. The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law and other partner organizations have fought the state of Texas over its restrictive law for the last several years.  To date, five federal courts have now found the law to have a discriminatory effect on African-American and Latino voters, or found that the law was clearly adopted with a disciminatory purpose.  However, the state has remained hostile and unrelenting in appealing its losses at every stage.

Our use of the courts as a forum to fight back has remained all the more crucial as the Justice Department, under the leadership of Attorney General Jeff Sessions, is fully abandoning federal voting rights enforcement.  In the ongoing Texas voter ID litigation, the Justice Department recently made an 11th hour decision to abandon its long-standing position that the law was adopted with a discriminatory purpose. 

In North Carolina, state officials adopted a sweeping package of voting restrictions shortly after the Shelby ruling, eliminating same-day registration, slashing pre-registration opportunities for 16- and 17-year-olds, striking out-of-precinct voting and eliminating early voting opportunities.  In July 2016, the Fourth Circuit struck down the law, described by critics as the “monster” voter suppression law.  The court accurately observed that officials acted with virtual “surgical precision” in instituting restrictions that specifically impacted African-American voters.

In Georgia, voting discrimination is especially pernicious at the local level. In Hancock County, officials sought to "clean up" the voter registration rolls by purging almost 20% of voters, primarily African American, in the county seat of Sparta. The sheriff's office then issued summonses requiring voters to appear with proof of their continued eligibility to vote.

In Macon-Bibb County, officials moved a polling site from a majority Black school to a local sheriff’s office.  We partnered with the community, overcame the recalcitrance of local officials and ultimately had the site moved to a Black church.

In Maricopa County, Arizona, officials cut the number of polling places from more than 200 in prior elections to just 60 during the 2016 primary season, resulting in long lines and extensive wait times at the polls. And in New York City, officials carried out a purge of the registration rolls in Brooklyn that clearly had a greater impact on minority voters.

Vigilance is required at the state and local level to fight voter suppression.

We must also be wary of the mischief that sometimes unfolds on Election Day itself. The Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law leads Election Protection, the nation’s largest non-partisan voter protection program. Along with a coalition of dozens of partner organizations, we fielded calls from more than 116,000 voters, and would-be voters, in 2016.  From misinformation about voter ID requirements, to polling sites moved without notice, to intimidation outside the polls, voters turned to our 866-OUR-VOTE hotline to report the barriers that sometimes stand between them and the ballot box. 

Confronting Election Day barriers must remain a core part of the strategy to expand access to democracy.

All of this takes us back to the Shelby decision; jurisdictions in many of the states and localities identified above were subject to the provision of the Voting Rights Act that was stripped away by the Supreme Court's Shelby ruling. These jurisdictions would have had to seek federal review before making these kinds of voting changes, and federal officials committed to enforcement of the Voting Rights Act would have blocked them.

It is incumbent upon Congress to restore the Voting Rights Act in the wake of the Shelby County decision.  Expanding access to democracy and eliminating voting discrimination are goals that should enjoy bipartisan support.

The last several years make clear that voting discrimination remains alive and well across our country. Vigilance is required to seize on actions taken to limit the right to vote.  Litigation is needed to confront and resist voter suppression. And strong bipartisan action on the part of Congress to restore our nation’s most important civil rights law is necessary to ensure that all eligible Americans are able to exercise the most sacred right to vote in our democracy. 

For the past eleven years, I have had the honor of representing the Ninth Congressional District of New York in the U.S. House of Representatives. In fact, I represent the very community that raised me. I still live on the same block where I grew up as a child in Central Brooklyn. I go to the same church, frequent the same restaurants, and maintain relationships I’ve had since I was a child.  I have seen the communities in my district transform throughout my lifetime from neighborhood restaurants with a cashier to restaurants adopting mobile devices and Square for payment. With advancements in technology, the notion of a smart community inspires endless possibilities. However, we must make sure that as our communities transform we are not lost in the digital divide. We can close the digital divide through strategic engagement and implementation with stakeholders from all backgrounds including the National Urban League, local elected officials, and public and private companies.

You may be asking yourself, “What is a smart city?” A smart community, city, and region is one where future technology is integrated into current infrastructure to improve communities and lives. The use of data and technology can drive efficiency, improve sustainability, and spur economic development and mobility. What does that mean? It means that smart meters and sensors could be placed on our roads so traffic lights can correspond with the number of cars on the road. It means, as we have seen in New York City, that old phone booths could be turned into Wi-Fi kiosks, providing hot spots and digital ads. It means that our children can access library resources digitally rather than having to visit the local library. It means that our seniors will be able to have their regular check-ups virtually via a computer rather than having to drive long distances to see their doctor. It means that small business owners can save money by having a website which allows customers to order online. As you can see, there are numerous benefits to living in a smart and connected community from education to telehealth to public safety.

Now you’re asking yourself, “Why should I care about my community getting ‘smarter’ when our basic needs have not been met, and so many are being left behind?” The answer is simple: when it comes to preparing for the future, we must demand that those in power pay attention to our needs because the needs of our children can no longer be neglected and ignored. That means we must make our voices, needs, and concerns known on a variety of topics, including preparing for the 21st century and the digital economy. It’s a known fact that African-Americans over-index on all facets of technology, especially smartphone usage. We are the trendsetters and the creative minds behind the trending topics, viral memes and movements on #BlackTwitter. We are the number one users of Facebook and Instagram, yet we are often the last when it comes to investments in our communities. This is unacceptable, and we must speak up now!

There are many ways in which my colleagues and I are speaking up to make sure our communities are not left behind. I, along with my dear friend and colleague Rep. Bobby Rush of Illinois, co-sponsored the Connecting Broadband Deserts Act of 2018.  This piece of legislation requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to conduct an annual assessment of the availability of advanced telecommunications capability in communities in urban areas where fewer than 33% of residents lack sufficient access to broadband service. Additionally, it requires the FCC to review areas where “digital redlining,” areas that are systematically excluded from digital resources and advanced technology, occurs.              

Additionally, I launched the Congressional Caucus on Smart Cities with my colleague, Rep. Darrell Issa of California. The caucus serves as a bipartisan group of Congressional members dedicated to ushering American communities into the 21st century through innovation and technological change. We plan to bring together various stakeholders, including Marc Morial of the National Urban League, state and local government elected officials, community leaders, industry representatives and people, like yourself, to share ideas and best practices. We’ll present Congress with insights and policies that can be implemented for the betterment of communities everywhere. The caucus focuses on four key pillars:

1) Mobility (e.g., infrastructure, transportation)

2) Connectivity (e.g., 5G, broadband deployment)

3) Sustainability (e.g., energy, environment)

4) Workforce (e.g., creating pipelines, retraining our workforce)

In closing, I look forward to working with constituents in my district and beyond and National Urban League affiliates to see how we can bring the smart cities discussion into our communities across the nation and the globe to prepare for the 21st century.

Black women are making indelible marks in the technology industry as leaders, entrepreneurs and influencers in the nation’s digital economy and are leading advocates for digital justice. From government to business, public interest to grassroots organizing—Black women are making a significant impact in changing the face of tech from a “white-males only club” to one that reflects and embraces the disruptive innovation that diversity and inclusion brings to the industry.  In the tech policy arena, Black women are staunch advocates and influencers on Capitol Hill, the Federal Communications Commission, Silicon Valley, and city halls across the country.  In the  political arena, Black women in government leadership recognize the transformative power that technological access, inclusion and entrepreneurship, affordable broadband, and other means of communications have in increasing the economic power of the Black community and the nation.  

One of the most powerful Black women leaders in government forging tech agendas and initiatives is former Federal Communications Commissioner Mignon Clyburn. Commissioner Clyburn consistently crafted FCC policies to provide equal technology access and inclusion to all consumers. Commissioner Clyburn’s many policy initiatives included expanding affordable broadband access to low-income and underserved consumers, ensuring that internet content is equally accessible to consumers (net neutrality) and eliminating the exorbitant phone rates imposed on consumers who communicate with their incarcerated family members.[1]

In local government, Mayor Muriel Bowser is leading the way to diversify the tech industry in the District of Columbia by establishing the Inclusive Innovation Incubator (In3), a partnership between D.C. government and Howard University to increase tech innovation among the diverse communities throughout the District as it expands its tech economy.[2]

In policy shops and news outlets, there are Black women policy experts who are driving research and advocacy. They are also leading public awareness around laws, policy, and industry practices that are being adopted—from issues of diversity and inclusion in the digital economy  to creating economic growth for the Black community,  and our nation, and impacting the international competitive advantage for the U.S. in the global digital economy.  Here are a few of those tech policy gurus impacting tech policy everyday:

• Maurita Coley Flippin, interim president and CEO of Multicultural Media, Telecom & Internet Council: Coley advocates for equal opportunity and civil rights in the media, telecommunications, and tech industries. Her work includes advocating with U.S. legislators, federal regulators, and the courts for laws and policies that promote equal access to technology and inclusion in all facets of technological employment and entrepreneurial opportunities for minorities.[3]
• Kristal High, co-founder and editor-in-chief of Politic365: High provides opinion and policy commentary from the perspective of people of color. Politic365 provides a venue to inform elected officials and community leaders about issues and policies that are important for the empowerment, enrichment, and education of people of color.[4]
• Nicole Turner-Lee, Ph.D., fellow, Center for Technology Innovation, Brookings Institution: Dr. Turner-Lee’s work is focused on researching public policy designed to enable equitable access to technology across the U.S. She is a sought-after expert on the intersection of race, wealth, and technology within the context of civic engagement, criminal justice, and economic development.[5]
• Joycelyn Tate, managing director of Tate Strategies and the co-founder of MakeIT4Change Innovation Hub: Tate is a policy advocate and strategist for laws and policies that advance entrepreneurial and employment opportunities for women and minorities in the tech sector. She advocates at the U.S. Congress and federal regulatory agencies. The MakeIT4Change  Innovation Hub is an organization that provides creative space and resources for youth and adults to develop tech products for social change.[6]  

In Silicon Valley, there is a new cohort of Black women leaders who are bringing unique civil rights and social justice backgrounds to the fight to challenge the tech industry and make the business case for diversity and inclusion. A few of those innovators include:

• Jotaka Eddy, vice president of policy, strategic engagement and impact at LendUp: Eddy leads LendUp’s regulatory, legislative, and social impact initiatives. She measures how LendUp’s products benefit consumers in areas such as savings on interest rates and fees. She also previously served as the Special Assistant to the President and CEO of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.[7]
• Chanelle Hardy, Esq., director of strategic outreach and external partnerships at Google: Hardy’s work is focused on building connections between Google and organizations doing innovative, tech-savvy policy work in racial and social justice and consumer advocacy. Prior to joining Google, Hardy served in senior positions on Capitol Hill in the Obama Administration and at the National Urban League.[8]

In the fight for digital justice, Black women leaders are highly sought after to assist companies that want to address issues of racial bias and discrimination.  In 2016, Airbnb hired Laura Murphy, a civil rights leader and civil liberties expert, to advise them after the damaging results of a Harvard University study and increasing complaints from Airbnb users of color who complained of racial bias and discrimination within the platform. Murphy successfully helped Airbnb update its policies and lead its efforts against discrimination. [9]

Black women are not only taking on the battle for digital justice, they are driving digital advocacy as a key organizing tool. The #BlackLivesMatter (BLM) hashtag and BLM movement were created in 2013 by three Black women, Alicia Garza, Patrisse Cullors, and Opal Tometi, in response to the unjust killing of Travyon Martin and the subsequent acquittal of his murderer. [10]

These are just a few of the Black women leading the charge for digital justice, advocacy, diversity, inclusion, and economic opportunity in the tech industry. Their dedication and leadership is opening doors of opportunity in the digital economy and cracking the double paned glass ceiling faced by all marginalized communities.
 

[1] Mignon Clyburn, Commissioner; Federal Communications Commission, accessed April 14, 2018.

https://www.fcc.gov/about/leadership/mignon-clyburn

[2]  Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development, DC’s First Inclusive Innovative Incubator Officially Opens, accessed April 14, 2018. https://dmped.dc.gov/release/dc%E2%80%99s-first-inclusive-innovation-incubator-officially-opens

[3] Maurita Coley, LinkedIn.com, accessed April 14, 2018, https://www.linkedin.com/in/mauritacoley

[4] Kristal Lauren High, Politic365, accessed April 14, 2018, http://politic365.com/about/kristal-lauren-high/

[5] Nicol Turner-Lee, Brookings, accessed April 14, 2018, https://www.brookings.edu/experts/nicol-turner-lee/

[6] Joycelyn Tate, LinkedIn.com, accessed April 14, 2018,  https://www.linkedin.com/in/joycelyntat

[7] Jotaka Eddy, LinkedIn.com, accessed April 12, 2018 https://www.linkedin.com/in/jotakaeaddy/.

[8] Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute, accessed April 12, 2018 https://www.chli.org/chanelle-hardy/.

[9] Charli Penn. Essence.com, published December 5, 2016. https://www.essence.com/lifestyle/travel/black-woman-laura-murphy-civil-rights-airbnb-discrimination

[10] BlackLivesMatter.com, accessed April 12, 2018. https://blacklivesmatter.com/about/herstory/  

We are on the advent of significant technological progress where machines and systems will make decisions based on learning from examples and concrete data sets. The positive implication of building processes on algorithms is that technology companies will have the ability to build better digital applications that interact with human-made objects, such as photos and online searches. The first step in creating an algorithm requires providing a program with lots and lots of data. However, when data is completely lacking for a community of color, this group simply does not exist in the digital space.

One group in particular bears the brunt of this online obscurity. Surveys and studies on digital access issues within communities of color consistently overlook the Asian American community, or worse, create incomplete pictures by only sampling a non-representative portion of the community. One often cited reason is that the community is too disparate to study in a cohesive manner. Another cited reason is the costs involved in sampling in multiple Asian languages.

Even efforts to collect data to assist companies in engaging Asian American consumers often miss the mark. One such study came to the questionable conclusion that 93% of Asian American households have high-speed internet access.  The survey recruited Asian participants online and in English, leaving out a significant population from the entire community. Approximately 23% of Asian households are limited English proficient, which means that any survey conducted only in English—and exclusively online—will result in skewed data.  This oversight when studying the Asian American community as it pertains to digital access is disconcerting, especially when one considers the fact that Asians remain the fastest-growing community of color in the United States. What’s more, as digital access moves from being a luxury to an absolute necessity for all communities, understanding the needs of this emerging and diverse population becomes even more important.

The Asian American community is not monolithic. Any effort to understand this community must be a deliberate and vested choice. With each ethnic group having distinct levels of success, history with our government, and predictors for upward mobility, understanding this community requires a dedicated interest in collecting accurate information. For example, U.S. Census Bureau data from the 2016 American Community Survey Single-Year Estimates show multiple Asian ethnic groups have a considerable percentage of households with less than a high school degree. Disaggregated data also reveals many Asian subgroups with lower income levels as well as limited English proficiency. Reviewing these factors unmasks a lack of digital access for a substantial proportion of the Asian American community.

Asian Americans Advancing Justice | AAJC works to empower the Asian American community and build an equitable society for all.  We rely on statistics and demographic data to help us understand the needs of our diverse community, especially as it concerns digital or telecommunications access. In some cases, when the data is missing, we work with community partners to identify Asian Americans struggling with access, as illustrated by the story of Mrs. Quach.

“I usually use the phone to listen to Vietnamese music,” she explained during a phone interview with our staff. Her responses were translated over the phone by a friend who was helping us understand how senior Vietnamese refugees in the Houston area were benefiting from Lifeline, a federal program administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) that provides discounted phone service for qualifying low-income consumers.

“I cannot afford to pay a monthly fee for the phone. The Lifeline program is important to me because it saves me money,” she continued.

Mrs. Quach is not alone in recognizing the benefits of such a critical program. In fact, over ten million subscribers were enrolled in 2017. Yet USAC, also charged with tracking Lifeline enrollment, only publishes data on enrollees who are Black, Latino, or white.  Asian Americans are completely left out of this data compilation. Without a clear idea of how Asian enrollees like Mrs. Quach benefit from Lifeline, it becomes difficult to develop advocacy points on the impact of this program on the broader Asian community.

The implications of failing to gather detailed information on an emerging community are far reaching. For example, the Census Bureau has announced its goal of having 55% of the U.S. population respond to the 2020 census survey online using computers, mobile phones or other devices. Apart from a small share of households in 2000, this will be the first time all American households will have the option to fill the census survey online. Without understanding the digital access needs of emerging communities such as refugees who have settled in large swaths or African immigrants, we risk leaving individuals uncounted and, ultimately, unrepresented.

Two major steps can be taken to address this growing issue. The first is to take a disaggregated data approach when surveying diverse communities to gain a clearer representation of their needs. Success in developing well-rounded studies will ensure a better understanding of those needs. The second step is to establish public, private, and non-profit partnerships when developing these studies. Companies that have the capital and the interest to invest in studies on telecommunications and technological access can only benefit from the expertise of non-profit organizations that can build culturally appropriate questions and provide translation experts in order to ensure that complex questions on digital connection are fully understood. 

From the civil rights perspective, surveys and studies customized to respective communities allow for better advocacy to better fund and market literacy and access programs that could benefit a substantial population. For private sector companies, understanding a community allows for targeted marketing, and ultimately, products that are needs-based. Better data drives better policies and allocation of resources from governments. It also shapes the planning, implementation, and delivery of services to all specific ethnic groups. In the end, having a comprehensive and quantitative understanding of diverse communities in the telecommunications and technology space is a net benefit for all.

After more than 100 years of service, the Chicago Urban League is a well-known entity in many circles, but it is not uncommon for Black Chicagoans to have little knowledge of the actual work of the organization. In fact, it is not uncommon for Black Americans to have little knowledge or an antiquated view of the work of the Urban League movement in general.

Unless they take part in our programs, many members of the very communities we aim to uplift instinctively dismiss the National Urban League as an outdated civil rights organization and often see it as irrelevant.

This lack of awareness has real and potential consequences for the National Urban League and its affiliates, including closing off possible sources of support, making it harder to attract the right talent, undermining the effectiveness of our advocacy for equity, and limiting the reach of our work to assist our communities.

So, in the era of always-on media and short attention spans, how do we increase awareness—especially among younger generations who can be particularly challenging to engage? Social media is an obvious play, and we have used it for years to build active engagement with our clients, auxiliaries, and supporters. But we recently turned to a new digital medium to expand our reach.

In 2017, we launched “A Seat at the Table,” a podcast series that has provided new content connections for our social media channels while increasing the Chicago Urban League's visibility as a relevant voice on critical issues. The series tackled "CULture, Race & Equity" in eight pilot episodes covering income inequality, disparities in education, healthcare, public safety, economic disinvestment, and police reform. We partnered with up-and-coming journalist and radio personality Dometi Pongo, a self-described millennial, to facilitate discussions with Chicago leaders working on these issues and to share findings from our Research and Policy Center.

With no traditional advertising, the podcast garnered 61,000 impressions across eight weeks and boosted our social media following. By the final episode, listeners played clips more than 9,000 times, up from 700 plays. Young leaders featured on the podcast shared it with their followers, and it also caught the attention of other civic organizations that provided episode links to their audiences.

The Chicago Urban League podcast has earned us a new seat at the digital table. This 21st century megaphone amplified our issues of concern,  our voice,  and our strategies by streaming the message, relevance, and ongoing civil rights work of the movement.

###

More than 90% of the U.S. population is connected to the internet and regularly engages its transformative and transactional capacities. Despite this positive trajectory in digital access, recent data from the Pew Research Center shares that 11% of Americans are still not online[1] These non-internet users are disproportionately people of color, low-income, less literate, seniors, and geographically isolated within rural areas. The reasons for their marginal internet use are largely due to a lack of interest, the cost of broadband services, and the inability to secure an affordable device, such as a smartphone, tablet, or computer.[2]

Unfortunately, not being online has consequences for the digitally disconnected.

In 2016, the digital economy accounted for 6.5% of current dollar GDP, and 6.2% of current-dollar gross output.[3] A 2016 report by Accenture found that a little over 40% of the U.S. labor force participated in digital-related activity, the highest percentage when compared to other countries.[4] Emerging technologies, including the internet of things (IoT), artificial intelligence (AI), machines, and even robots, are also contributing to the sector’s growth, especially in areas where automated decision making processes are replacing humans and affecting the future of work.

Given the global adoption of technology, African Americans, especially those experiencing the additive effects of other demographics, run the risk of digital exclusion where the costs of not being online further perpetuate discrimination and inequality. This essay discusses the impending online marginalization of African Americans and offers public policy recommendations to accelerate their participation in the digital age.

The persistent digital divide

According to Pew, 20% of African Americans and 18% of Hispanics do not use the internet, compared to 14% of whites.[5] While vulnerable populations have higher rates of smartphone adoption, Pew’s data also found that the cost of wireless service, particularly data, can be prohibitive for low-income consumers who make daily decisions about paying their monthly bill or supporting other living expenses.[6]

Not surprisingly, people who are disadvantaged in the information economy also mirror the realities of citizens who have limited avenues to economic and social mobility due to higher rates of unemployment or disparate access to a quality education. During the sixties, sociologist Michael Harrington shed light on the “other America” when he described the progressive state of U.S. poverty and the inability of established anti-poverty programs to improve the life chances of the poor.[7] The same paradigm could be applied today to explain why non-internet adopters also often face a degraded quality of life simply because they lack a broadband connection.

Equitable access now and into the future

In this section, I offer three public policy recommendations that can reverse the trends of digital invisibility experienced by African Americans in the information economy. First, the internet has evolved from a composite destination of static websites to more transactional content found on commerce and social media platforms. Consequently, getting connected now requires both the collateral and credit for participation—the basics for equal opportunity and participation online. The new collateral in the digital age is an internet-enabled device, making national and local programs that offer affordable hardware critical to online access.

Personal credit has also become an important requisite for participation in the digital age. Whether ordering an Uber via a smartphone application or renting a room on Airbnb, African Americans, especially those who are unbanked, must have access to credit or a bank account for meaningful engagement of the commercial internet. In some instances, the cost of not having credit can subject Black consumers to a less competitive marketplace for goods and services, keeping them dependent on local food and commercial deserts. Because underbanked or credit-challenged consumers will eventually pay more for accessing services in line versus online, policymakers must look for alternative methods for online economic inclusion to buffer the effects of the disparate treatment of certain populations in the emerging digital economy.

Second, federal programs that make broadband connections affordable and widely available should be supported—not gradually phased out. Established in 1985 under the Reagan administration, the monthly $9.25 Lifeline subsidy was originally intended to offset the cost of telephone service. Later, the program was updated to include mobile, and just recently, high-speed broadband service. Despite being administered by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), an independent regulatory agency, the universal service program has become partisan, facing threats to program eligibility requirements, hard budget caps, and non-competitive determinations on which companies can administer the benefit. These threats, along with a pending proposal to prioritize the benefit for rural over urban residents, will disproportionately affect African Americans and regress any progress toward affordable internet access, making it critical for Congress to intervene on behalf of all eligible individuals and households.

Simultaneously, African Americans must have access to next generation wireless and wireline networks. 5G wireless technology—the newest mobile standard to reach the marketplace in 2020—will enable smart cities initiatives, while accelerating the delivery of online services, including precision medicine, distance learning, and emergency response communications. But just like any other network, 5G technologies must be equitably deployed in communities of color to avoid the practice of digital redlining, which could emulate the discriminatory histories of banks and housing developers not serving African Americans and their communities. The FCC, whose charge is to lead broadband deployment, must ensure that redlining is both prohibited and called out among companies that demonstrate discriminatory intent. To counter the effects of digital isolation, best efforts should be put forth to deliver the most competitive broadband solutions to communities of color, irrespective of location.

Finally, solutions should be implemented that reduce, or better yet, eliminate bias from newer and emerging technologies that have the potential to manage and minimize the effects of digital inequalities, including algorithms, AI, and machine learning. Computers do not program themselves. Data scientists, engineers, and other innovators bring their own set of explicit, implicit, and unconscious biases to the design of computer systems and computational procedures, also known as algorithms. From facial recognition technologies that returned pictures of “gorillas” during what began as an innocuous online search of the term “African American”[8] to a host of other racially-charged examples (including online voter suppression by the Russians), much is unknown about the effects of this type of racial profiling and discrimination. What we do know is that big data can be manipulated to further oppress historically disadvantaged groups, making online bias detection and mitigation even harder. Policymakers, industry leaders, activists, and data scientists must come together to address the inequalities embedded in these disruptive technologies to ensure that African Americans and other people of color are not further rendered invisible or irrelevant within the digital economy.

Conclusion

In his classic novel, The Invisible Man, author Ralph Ellison wrote that “[w]hen I discover who I am, I will be free.”[9] Having digital access is no longer a privilege in the U.S. as it increasingly becomes a bridge to economic and social mobility. Consequently, it’s time for African Americans to craft an agenda that secures digital equity—now and into the future.

 1Anderson, Monica, A. Perrin, and J. Jiang. (March 5, 2018). “11% of Americans don’t use the internet. Who are they?” Washington, DC, Pew Research Center, available at http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/05/some-americans-dont-use-the-internet-who-are-they/ (accessed March 31, 2018).

 2Lewis, Maureen (September 8, 2016). “Digitally unconnected in the U.S.: Who’s not online and why?” Washington, DC, National Telecommunications Information Administration, available at https://www.ntia.doc.gov/blog/2016/digitally-unconnected-us-who-s-not-online-and-why (accessed March 31, 2018).

 3Barefoot, Kevin, D. Curtis, W. Joliff, J. R. Nicholson, and R. Omohundro. (March 15, 2018) Defining and measuring the digital economy. Washington, DC, Bureau of Economic Analysis, available at, https://bea.gov/digital-economy/_pdf/defining-and-measuring-the-digital-economy.pdf (accessed March 31, 2018).

 4Ibid.

 5Anderson, Monica, et. al. (March 5, 2018). “11% of Americans don’t use the internet. Who are they?” Washington, DC, Pew Research Center, available at http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/03/05/some-americans-dont-use-the-internet-who-are-they/ (accessed March 31, 2018).

 6Smith, Aaron. (April 1, 2015). U.S. Smartphone Use in 2015. Washington, DC, Pew Research Center, available at, http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/01/us-smartphone-use-in-2015/ (accessed March 31, 2018).

7Harrington, Michael. (1962). The Other America. New York: Simon Schuster.

8Guyunn, Jessica. (July 1, 2015). “Google photos labeled black people as gorillas.” USA Today, available at, https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2015/07/01/google-apologizes-after-photos-identify-black-people-as-gorillas/29567465/ (accessed March 31, 2018).

9Ellison, Ralph. (1955). The Invisible Man. First published by Vintage.