The Disability Digital Divide

By: Shane Johnson

What is the Digital Divide?

While the digital divide is sometimes thought of simply as who has access to the internet and who does not, it is more complex. According to Syracuse University, the digital divide has 3 major aspects [1]. These are an access divide, a skills divide, and a usage divide. The access divide refers to differences in who has access to an internet connection, both in terms of necessary infrastructure and affordability, as well as who owns the number and type of devices they need to make use of digital services [1]. The skills divide refers to differences in who has sufficient digital literacy to utilize technology safely and effectively [1]. Digital literacy consists of a broad set of skills ranging from simple tasks such as completing a web search, sending an email, or using video chat to more complex activities such as filling out a job application, taking an online course, or recognizing and avoiding misinformation and scams [1]. Lastly, the usage divide refers to differences in how groups tend to use the internet, with research indicating that disadvantaged groups are more likely to use the internet for things that are beneficial in the short term, such as entertainment, while privileged groups are more likely to engage in activities with long term benefits, such as education [1].

Taken together, the digital divide describes “the gap between people who have 

meaningful access to digital technology and those who don’t” [1].This gap reflects systemic disparities and can be found across a broad range of demographic factors including: socioeconomic status, urban vs. rural living environment, race, age, education level, and disability status [1]. This article focuses on the digital divide as it relates to individuals with disabilities in the United States.

The Disability Digital Divide by the Numbers

According to a 2022 report by the Office of Disability Employment Policy, individuals with disabilities were less likely to have a home internet subscription (78.4% vs. 91.5%), and, among subscribers, less likely to have high speed internet (79.7% vs. 84.1%) when compared to people without disabilities [2]. The same report found that those with disabilities over the age of 15 were less likely than their non-disabled peers to use the internet in general (63.8% vs. 83.4%) [2]. Additionally, a 2021 survey by Pew Research Center showed that disabled adults are significantly less likely to own a desktop or laptop computer (62% vs. 81%) than those without disabilities. A similar gap was found for smartphone ownership (72% vs. 88%) [3].

How are Individuals with Disabilities Affected by the Digital Divide?

As more and more aspects of daily life become intertwined with technology, the ability to access and the skills to effectively use the internet and smart devices have become necessary parts of full participation in society. This means that digital exclusion as a result of the digital divide can have widespread negative effects on health and wellbeing. In fact, while public health professionals have traditionally considered factors such as employment, housing, education, personal relationships, and access to medical care to be Social Determinants of Health (SDOH), in recent years, driven in part by the COVID-19 pandemic, there has has been a push to recognize broadband access and digital literacy as SDOH [4]. Many in the field go a step further calling them Super Social Determinants of Health [5][6][7]. This is because of the central role the internet now plays in the way people work or find jobs, receive healthcare, learn, navigate the social safety net, and connect with friends and family. This recognition of the importance of digital inclusion has reached as far as the federal government, with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) noting broadband connectivity as a Social Determinant of Health in 2022 and the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) calling digital access a super determinant in 2023 [7][8]. Though, the latter was taken down from the SAMHSA blog, presumably due to the article’s use of the term health equity, and is currently only available through the Internet Archive.

Disabled people are more vulnerable to the negative consequences of the digital divide than other groups due to the fact that many cannot meet their basic needs without access to smart devices and/or virtual spaces, because the alternative remains inaccessible [9]. Even for those who can get by with analog options, modern technology often levels the playing field further, promoting increased autonomy and independence. For instance, a smartphone with accessibility features can enable a blind person to independently read books, browse the internet, print documents, and get directions, unlike analog methods which can require a person to purchase multiple pieces of specialized equipment or rely on sighted assistance to complete the same tasks [10].

Additionally, data shows that disabled people experience several forms of marginalization, including significant economic and health disparities. These include being nearly 3 times less likely to be employed, more than twice as likely to not have a bachelor’s degree or higher, and twice as likely to live in poverty than their non-disabled counterparts, as well as being more likely to report having poor health and to experience intimate partner violence [11][12][13][14]. Therefore, it is even more important for individuals with disabilities to have full access to digital technology, so that existing disparities can be improved rather than further exacerbated as technology advances.

What Work is Being Done to Address the Digital Divide?

Due to its complexity and national scope, the digital divide is best addressed by federal funding and resources. Unfortunately, bridging the digital divide has become politically contentious under the current administration, as a result of the necessary emphasis on principles such as equity and inclusion. Many of the prior administration’s initiatives including the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) program and the Digital Equity Act have had key components eliminated or significantly reworked [15][16]. The Digital Equity Act, which would have provided funding to states for the implementation of State Digital Equity Plans, with the goal of expanding broadband access, improving digital literacy, and increasing overall digital inclusion for marginalized populations has been entirely terminated, except for a small pool of money set aside for Competitive Community Grants [16]. This means that states will no longer receive funds to implement their Digital Equity Plans [16]. The BEAD program has fared somewhat better, but has faced a number of changes that work to undermine the goals of the program. For instance, while low cost service options are still required, states are no longer permitted to set the rate of a low cost plan, effectively allowing internet service providers full control over price [15].

Despite considerable setbacks at the federal level, many organizations are still working to tackle the digital divide. Chief among these are State Broadband Offices, which are actively utilizing BEAD program funding to improve broadband access [17]. Offices provide a range of resources specifically for individuals with disabilities. BroadbandOhio, for example, “awarded $600,000 in grants for a one-year pilot program to provide broadband access to up to 500 residents with developmental disabilities so that they can access…remote support services [18]. Other initiatives are being implemented by national nonprofits like the National Digital Inclusion Association (NDIA) and The ARC. The NDIA promotes digital equity through program support, policy advocacy, and research, while The ARC, a disability advocacy organization, is working to promote digital literacy in individuals with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities through a partnership with AT&T [19][20]. The partnership has produced online skills courses on a variety of topics and provides funding for in-person skills workshops at 14 of ARC’s chapters [20]. Other work is being done on a regional level, such as by Easterseals Southern California, which established a Technology Lending Library that seeks to address the access divide by providing laptops and tablets to individuals receiving services [21].

What is the Future of the Disability Digital Divide?

In our current moment of technological advancement, the digital divide is rapidly taking on a new dimension. Marginalized groups are disproportionately harmed by artificial intelligence technologies, such as Large Language Models (LLMs) while being less likely to benefit from them [22][23]. People with disabilities are no exception. Due to the nature of LLMs, which require vast amounts of relevant training data in order to produce accurate outputs, disabled people face significant negative consequences when interacting with AI tech, including more frequently inaccurate age determinations from age verification systems and employment discrimination from AI resume scanners and interviewing software [24][25][26]. Additionally, it is important to note that many current AI technologies are being shaped and/or largely funded by individuals and groups with strong ties to eugenicist ideologies [27][28]. This means that the digital divide is likely to get worse, perhaps dangerously so, unless real care is taken to fully integrate people with disabilities into the current technological landscape and center disabled perspectives of what technology can and should be.

References: 

[1] “What Is the Digital Divide? Meaning, Causes & Impact.” Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://ischool.syracuse.edu/what-is-the-digital-divide/ 

[2] Office of Disability Employment Policy, “Disability and the Digital Divide,” Jun. 2022. 

[3] A. Perrin and S. Atske, “Americans with disabilities less likely than those without to own some digital devices,” Pew Research Center. Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2021/09/10/americans-with-disabilities-less-likely-than-those-without-to-own-some-digital-devices/ 

[4] N. C. Benda, T. C. Veinot, C. J. Sieck, and J. S. Ancker, “Broadband Internet Access Is a Social Determinant of Health!,” Am. J. Public Health, vol. 110, no. 8, pp. 1123–1125, Aug. 2020, doi: 10.2105/AJPH.2020.305784. 

[5] “Bridging the Broadband Health Gap.” Accessed: Aug. 12, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.benton.org/sites/default/files/HealthGap.pdf 

[6] C. J. Sieck, A. Sheon, J. S. Ancker, J. Castek, B. Callahan, and A. Siefer, “Digital inclusion as a social determinant of health,” NPJ Digit. Med., vol. 4, p. 52, Mar. 2021, doi: 10.1038/s41746-021-00413-8. 

[7] Y. Turcios, “Digital Access: A Super Determinant of Health | SAMHSA.” Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://web.archive.org/web/20250201105103/https://www.samhsa.gov/blog/digital-access-super-determinant-health 

[8] “Advancing Broadband Connectivity as a Social Determinant of Health | Federal Communications Commission.” Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.fcc.gov/health/SDOH 

[9] “How to Make Emerging Tech Work for Communities with Disabilities,” New America. Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.newamerica.org/insights/ai-tech-inclusion-disabilities-design/ 

[10] R. Marks, “Commentary: On How Mainstream Technology Is Including People with Disabilities,” The Chicago Lighthouse. Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://chicagolighthouse.org/sandys-view/mainstream-technology/ 

[11] “Disabled Workers Saw Record Employment Gains in 2023, But Gaps Remain,” Center for American Progress. Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.americanprogress.org/article/disabled-workers-saw-record-employment-gains-in-2023-but-gaps-remain/ 

[12] N. Goodman, M. Morris, and K. Boston, “Financial Inequality: Disability, Race and Poverty in America”. 

[13] “National Council on Disability | 2023 Progress Report: Toward Economic Security: The Impact of Income and Asset Limits on People with Disabilities.” Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.ncd.gov/report/2023-progress-report-toward-economic-security-the-impact-of-income-and-asset-limits-on-people-with-disabilities/ 

[14] M. Mitra, L. Long-Bellil, I. Moura, A. Miles, and H. S. Kaye, “Advancing Health Equity And Reducing Health Disparities For People With Disabilities In The United States,” Health Aff. (Millwood), vol. 41, no. 10, pp. 1379–1386, Oct. 2022, doi: 10.1377/hlthaff.2022.00499. 

[15] “BEAD Rewired: What the Changes to the Broadband Program Mean for States.” Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.ncsl.org/technology-and-communication/bead-rewired-what-the-changes-to-the-broadband-program-mean-for-states 

[16] “FAQ: Cancellation of the Digital Equity Act Grant Programs | ALA.” Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.ala.org/advocacy/federal-resources/broadband-policy/digital-equity-resources/DEA-FAQ 

[17] “How State Broadband Offices Are Expanding Internet Access,” National Conference of State Legislatures. Accessed: Aug. 12, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.ncsl.org/state-legislatures-news/details/how-state-broadband-offices-are-expanding-internet-access 

[18] “Digital Opportunity Plan - BroadbandOhio”. 

[19] “Do the Work,” National Digital Inclusion Alliance. Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.digitalinclusion.org/do-the-work/ 

[20] “Digital Literacy,” The Arc. Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://thearc.org/our-initiatives/digital-literacy/ 

[21] K. Lapadula, “Easterseals’ Technology Lending Library: Addressing the Digital Divide in the Disability Community,” Easterseals Southern California Blog. Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://esscblog.com/uncategorized/easterseals-technology-lending-library-addressing-the-digital-divide-in-the-disability-community/ 

[22] R. McIlroy-Young, “The Folly of AI for Age Verification,” May 27, 2025, arXiv: arXiv:2506.00038. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2506.00038. 

[23] N. Sheard, “Algorithm-facilitated discrimination: a socio-legal study of the use by employers of artificial intelligence hiring systems,” J. Law Soc., vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 269–291, 2025, doi: 10.1111/jols.12535. 

[24] “Age Verification Technology Would Create New Barriers for Young Disabled People | Teen Vogue.” Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.teenvogue.com/story/age-verification-technology-disabled-people 

[25] “Algorithms, Artificial Intelligence, and Disability Discrimination in Hiring,” ADA.gov. Accessed: Aug. 12, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.ada.gov/resources/ai-guidance/ 

[26] “Artificial Intelligence Hiring Technology and Disability Discrimination.” Accessed: Aug. 12, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://stpp.fordschool.umich.edu/sites/stpp/files/2024-02/stpp-ai-hiring-policy-2024.pdf 

[27] T. Gebru and É. P. Torres, “The TESCREAL bundle: Eugenics and the promise of utopia through artificial general intelligence,” First Monday, Apr. 2024, doi: 10.5210/fm.v29i4.13636. 

[28] A. Anthony, “‘Eugenics on steroids’: the toxic and contested legacy of Oxford’s Future of Humanity Institute,” The Guardian, Apr. 28, 2024. Accessed: Aug. 11, 2026. [Online]. Available: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2024/apr/28/nick-bostrom-controversial-future-of-humanity-institute-closure-longtermism-affective-altruism