In the Election Questions 2025 series, researchers at the University of Twente explore how science can help us better understand dilemmas surrounding elections. This time, we spoke with Alexander van Deursen, Professor of Digital Inequality, about what happens when digital inequality grows into democratic inequality.
The promises and limits of digitalisation
"Our dependence on technology keeps increasing," Van Deursen begins. "We use digital tools for almost everything, and that change is happening incredibly fast."
According to him, there are two ways to look at this development. "Optimists mainly see opportunities, believing that technology can make society smarter and fairer. But critics warn of the risks, such as the loss of privacy or freedom."
The truth, says Van Deursen, lies somewhere in between. "We often hear the positive stories about digitalisation, but they tend to obscure the fact that not everyone benefits equally from technological progress."
The many faces of digital inequality
Digital inequality is not just about access to the internet. It also concerns motivation, skills, equipment and, ultimately, the outcomes of online engagement. "It starts with motivation and whether people have the right tools," Van Deursen explains. "For someone with only an old smartphone, it can be difficult to take part in online debates or e-participation platforms, even if they are motivated to do so."
Digital skills, however, play the biggest role. "Many people struggle to find, select and assess information," he says. "They may not recognise misleading or manipulative messages and do not always know what they can trust. It is also harder for them to critically assess advice from AI tools, which are often far from neutral and sometimes biased towards one or two political parties."
This leads to structural differences, Van Deursen warns. "People with higher incomes or education levels tend to benefit more from technology. They are better able to evaluate information and protect themselves from risks. Those in less privileged positions, unfortunately, experience more of the downsides. As a result, the gap has only widened in recent years."
Democratic inequality
That gap has direct consequences for our democracy. "More and more political information, election campaigns and government services are now online," Van Deursen notes. "Digitally skilled citizens stay well informed and can participate actively. Those lacking these skills quickly fall behind, consciously or not."
The outcome is that some voices are heard more loudly than others. "Digitally skilled citizens dominate online debates," he explains. "Their perspectives receive more attention, while other groups remain less visible. This creates a distorted image of what society actually thinks and undermines the representativeness of democracy."
Limited digital skills also increase the risk of misinformation. "People who do not understand how information and algorithms work are more susceptible to misleading content,” says Van Deursen. "That can fuel polarisation and make it harder to agree on a shared set of facts."
More than access alone
For a long time, policy mainly focused on access, ensuring that everyone could get online. But that, Van Deursen argues, is only the first step. "The real difference lies in what people can actually do with that access," he says. "You can own a laptop, but if you cannot judge whether the information you find is reliable, that access has limited value."
He therefore advocates for structural investments in digital skills: learning how information is created, how to interpret and evaluate it, and how to use technology strategically. "That starts in education, but also in community centres or through accessible support for vulnerable groups," he explains. "Digital skills are not a luxury; they are a prerequisite for being a full citizen."
A democracy that includes everyone
The digitalisation of government and society requires more than education alone. There is still much to improve in the design of online interfaces. "People who struggle with digital forms or login procedures face an extra barrier to making their voices heard," Van Deursen says. "We need to design digital public services that are truly accessible for everyone, regardless of age, education or background."
"Democracy assumes that everyone can participate," he continues. "If we want to live up to that ideal in the digital age, we must ensure that no one is left behind."
Participation starts with the ability to participate
So, what happens when not everyone can take part in digital democracy? "Then the promise of digitalisation turns into a risk," says Van Deursen. "Many services are intended for everyone, yet in practice, not everyone can participate. The result is that those services drive us further apart."
The solution, he concludes, lies not only in more technology but also in more humanity. "We need to make sure that everyone has the knowledge, tools and skills to participate both digitally and democratically. That is not a luxury, it is the foundation of a healthy society."
"As I see it," Van Deursen concludes, "a democracy truly belongs to everyone only when everyone can be heard, both online and offline."
