INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
Internet Use in the Philippines
Iremae D. Labucay
Social Weather Stations
August 2011
DRAFT. PLEASE DO NOT CITE WITHOUT PERMISSION.
Paper to be presented at the 2011 Annual Conference of the
World Association for Public Opinion,
21-21 September 2011, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Author Note
Iremae D. Labucay is a Senior Survey Analyst at Social Weather Stations (SWS). SWS is
a non stock, non-profit social research organization in the Philippines.
Correspondence should be addressed to: Iremae D. Labucay, c/o Social Weather Stations,
52
Malingap
Street,
mae.labucay@sws.org.ph
Sikatuna
Village,
1101
Quezon
City,
Philippines;
Email:
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
1
Abstract
This paper reports on the patterns of Internet use in the Philippines using survey data gathered by
Social Weather Stations (SWS), a social research institute in the Philippines. As of March 2011,
there are only about one in five adult Filipinos who use the Internet. Survey data also indicate the
presence of digital divide in Internet use with Internet use being higher in the National Capital
Region than in the provincial areas, in urban areas, among middle-to-upper classes ABC, the
college graduates, and the youth. Filipino Internet users access the Internet largely for social
networking rather than information seeking or learning, creativity and production, commercial
activities, and entertainment and leisure play. The findings underscore the challenges in
conducting public opinion research using the Internet in the Philippines.
Keywords: Internet use, Philippines, social networking, digital divide
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
2
The first Filipino logged in to the Internet on March 29, 1994, when the Philippine
Network Foundation, a consortium of private and public institutions, obtained the country’s first
public permanent connection to the Internet (Minges, Magpantay, Firth and Kelly, 2002). Since
then, the number of Filipino Internet users has grown, gradually at first but considerably rapid in
the past few years. The International Communication Union (ITU) estimates that from a mere
4,000 Internet users in 1994, there were about 8.3 million of Filipino Internet users in 2009.
Although this rate of Internet adoption is considerably lower than its Southeast Asian neighbors,
the percentage of Filipino Internet users has exponentially increased from 0.005% of the total
population in 1994 to 9% in 2009. The Filipinos, indeed, are getting “sucked into worldwide
web” (Ho, 2009).
Yet, despite this growth of Internet use in the Philippines, there seems to be a scarcity on
data on the Filipino Internet users’ online behavior. Few studies on patterns of Internet use have
been conducted, but these studies were limited in geographic coverage and to select
subjects/respondents. The Yahoo!-Nielsen Net Index initiative, conducted twice since 2009, only
gathers data on Internet users in National Urban Philippines, or in only 22 major cities across the
country. The Asia Institute of Journalism and Communication conducted for the United Nations
Children's Fund (UNICEF) a nationwide survey on Internet access and use by Filipino
schoolchildren. Although these studies provide a snapshot of how and why Filipinos use the
Internet, they do not provide a comprehensive picture on the socio-demographic factors that
promote (or hinder) access to and use of the Internet. Even government-produced statistics on the
usage of the Internet – or on information communication technology for that matter – are limited,
not updated regularly, and not readily available to the public.
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
3
This paper, therefore, aims to fill this research gap by presenting data from nationally
representative surveys on the patterns of Internet use among Filipino adults aged 18 and above.
Using survey data gathered by Social Weather Stations, the paper thus attempts to answer these
core questions: Who can access online? Who are online? How often they go online? What do
they do online?
In particular, the paper will examine the socio-demographic differences in Internet use
and online activities of Filipinos. Ajzen and Fishbein in their study (cited in Akman & Mishra,
2010) found that that certain socio-demographic characteristics of individuals influence their
actions and behaviors. Previous research has shown that the patterns of access and use of the
Internet vary with across socio-demographic groups, thus affecting how both the users and nonusers could access the improved opportunities in education, employment and civic engagement
brought on by the facets of the Internet (Norris, 2001; Ono and Zavodny, 2007). It is therefore
necessary to understand how the socio-demographic attributes of the Internet users promote (or
hinder) their access to and use of the Internet, and to use this knowledge to bridge the gap
between the Internet users who have already benefited from the increased opportunities bought
by the Internet and the non-Internet users who have not experienced these benefits. Knowing the
trends in this gap of the Internet haves and the have-nots – known as the Internet digital divide –
would in turn enable policymakers to design initiatives specifically targeted at the have-nots.
Ultimately, bridging the digital divide is expected to “diminish inequalities in public life by
sharply reducing…certain barriers to civic engagement, leveling some of the financial hurdles,
and widening the opportunities for political debate, the dissemination of information, and
networks of new social movements” (Norris, 2001).
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
4
Method
Data
The paper analyzed various survey data on Internet access and Internet use gathered by
Social Weather Stations (SWS) from 1997 to 2011 through its quarterly Social Weather Surveys.
Data were gathered through face-to-face interviews of a nationally representative sample of
1,200 voting age adults (18 years old and above) per quarter. The Philippines was divided into
four major study areas: National Capital Region (NCR), Balance Luzon (areas outside of Metro
Manila but within Luzon), Visayas and Mindanao. The sample size was equally divided into 300
respondents in each of the four study areas (sampling error margins of ±3.0% for national
percentages, ±6.0% for each of the four study areas). Multi-stage probability sampling was used
in selecting the adult respondents.
Measures
In the March 2011 Social Weather Survey, Internet use was measured by asking “Do you
ever go online to access the Internet or the World Wide Web or send and receive email?”. A
follow up question was asked to determine frequency of use, with the respondents choosing from
six response categories: “a few times a day,” “at least once a day,” “3-5 days a week,” “1-2 days
a week,” “every other weeks,” and “less often”. To simplify discussion, however, these seven
response categories were reduced to three categories: frequent (using at least daily), moderate
(using at least weekly), and infrequent (using less than weekly).
From 2006 to 2010, SWS measured Internet use by first asking “Do you use a computer
at your workplace, at school, at home, or anywhere else at least on an occasional basis?”. Those
who answered Yes were then asked a follow-up question, “Do you ever go online to access the
internet or the World Wide Web or send and receive email?”.
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
5
To determine what online activities, the Internet users were simply asked whether or not
they ever done each of nine activities tested.
Social Weather Surveys also regularly obtain information and background characteristics
about the respondents, the household, the household head and family members, such as gender,
areas, age, locale, educational attainment, marital status, work status, household facilities, among
others. For this paper, socio-economic class was used as a proxy indicator of household income.
Socio-economic classification, which is often used in market research, divides the population
into four socio-economic classes: the rich classes AB, the middle class C, the poor D, and the
very poor E. Per standard SWS practice, the rich AB and the middle class C are combined as
middle-to-upper classes ABC.
Survey Results
Who can access online?: General access to computers and Internet
SWS data on household facilities from 1997 to 2010 shows that computer ownership and
access to Internet in the household is generally low and hardly changed until the last three years
when it reached double-digit levels. Data on computer ownership is an important measure of
Internet use because computers have long been the only device needed to access the Internet.
As shown in Table 1, ownership of computer in the household has ranged from 3% in
1997 to 7% in 2007, before increasing to 10% in 2008, 11% in 2009 and 12% in 2010. In
absolute terms, the proportions of households with computers have increased from about 414,000
in 1997 (out of the projected 12.8 million households) to 2.1 million in 2010 (out of the projected
18.8 million households).
Computer penetration in the household has always been highest in NCR, in urban areas,
and among middle-to-upper classes ABC. As of 2010, households in Metro Manila are twice
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
6
more likely than households in the provincial areas to own a computer. By locale, computer
ownership is three times more in urban households than in rural households. The disparity in
access to computer is more noticeable across socio-economic class: 43% of households in classes
ABC own a computer, twice than the combined percentage of households in classes D and E who
also own a computer.
Table 2 shows that access to Internet in the household is even lower than computer
ownership. The percentages of households with Internet connection have ranged from only 1% to
3% between 1998 and 2007, before it increased to 4% in 2008 and 2009, and to 6% in 2010.
These correspond to an increase from 230,000 households in 1998 (out of the projected 14.4
million households) to 1.3 million households in 2010 (out of the projected 18.8 million
households).
From 1998 to 2010, households with Internet connection in NCR have ranged from 7% to
18%. In provincial areas, though, Internet penetration remains well below 10%. Internet
penetration in urban households has gradually increased from 3% in 1998 to 10% in 2010, but in
the rural areas, Internet access was zero until in 2006. By socio-economic class, Internet
penetration among households in classes ABC has ranged from 12% to 29%, in contrast to
among households in class D where it ranged between 1% and 6%, and among class E where
Internet penetration was zero until 2009.
[TABLES 1 AND 2]
Who are online?
About one in every five (19%) of Filipino adults go online to access the Internet or the
World Wide Web or send and receive email, as of the March 2011 Social Weather Survey (see
Figure 1). This is equivalent to about 10.7 million out of the projected 55.3 million Filipino adult
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
7
population. From 2006 to 2008, the percentage of computer users who use the Internet has
ranged from 11% to 12%. It slightly increased to 13% in 2009, and then to 16% in 2010.
Table 3 shows the socio-demographic characteristics of adult Filipino Internet users
based on the March 2011 survey. To provide some statistical analysis to validate the strength and
direction of the association of the socio-demographic characteristics of Internet users, gamma
test was conducted.1 Except for gender, all other socio-demographic attributes tested were found
to be statistically associated with Internet use.
Internet use is highest in NCR, and decreases the farther from the capital region. Twentynine percent in NCR use the Internet, much higher than the 12% in Mindanao who are also
Internet users. By locale, one-fourth of the urban dwellers use the Internet, twice more than the
Internet users in rural areas. Two-fifths of those from middle-to-upper classes ABC are Internet
users, nearly twice more than those from poor class D and six times more than those from very
poor class E who are also Internet users. Internet use increases with education, with about half of
the college graduates who use the Internet, compared to only about a tenth of those with primary
education or less who also use the Internet.
Men and women are equally likely to use the Internet. Age, however, is a strong predictor
of Internet use, such that Internet use is highest among the youth and decreases with age.
Majority of those aged 18-24 use the Internet, compared to only 2% of those aged 55 and above
who also use the Internet. Internet use is higher among the unmarried people than those who are
married. One-third of unmarried adults are Internet users, nearly three times more than the
percentage of married people who also use the Internet.
1
Gamma test was chosen because most variables utilized in the survey are in the ordinal scale, i.e. they have ranks
or presumed to have ranks from highest to lowest or vice-versa. Gamma coefficients range from -1.00 to +1.00,
with values +1.00 and -1.00 expressing perfect positive and negative association, respectively, between two
variables. In turn, coefficients of 0.00 indicate the absence of association. For this paper, correlation coefficients
considered statistically are those significant at the 95% confidence level or higher.
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
8
One important finding is that the presence of an Overseas Filipino Worker (OFW) in the
household has a significant impact on Internet use. The Philippines is the second-largest laborexporting country after Mexico, with 4.7 million Filipinos working in about 197 countries
(Guerrero, Labucay, Sandoval & Mangahas, 2009). Thirty-one percent of adults in households
with OFW use the Internet, which is twice more likely to than those without an OFW in the
household.
Internet use is higher among those who have access to computer and Internet connection
in the household. Three-fifths of adults with computer in the household are Internet users,
compared to only 15% of those without computers. Three-fourths of those with computers with
Internet connection at home naturally use the Internet, compared to only 16% of those without
Internet connection at home.
By work status, those not working are slightly more likely to use the Internet than those
working. Among those working, however, occupation type is strong indicator of Internet use,
with Internet use higher among the hired workers (particularly among the managers,
professionals/technical workers, and those involved in clerical/administrative/sales) than the
employers and self-employed.
[FIGURE 1, TABLE 3]
Internet use by proxy
Despite the low percentage of Internet use among adult Filipinos, a June 2011 SWS
survey found that majority of the non-Internet users are, in fact, proxy users. Proxy Internet users
are defined in Dutton, Helsper & Gerber (2009) as those “who use the Internet through another
person, such as a family member, but who do not use it themselves in a more direct way”.
Seventy percent of non-Internet users say they know of someone who could access the Internet
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
9
on their behalf. Non-users are mostly likely to ask other family members like
children/grandchildren (21%), spouse (13%) and siblings (11%), and their friends (33%) to
access the Internet on their behalf.
As shown in Table 4, majorities of non-users from Visayas, Balance Luzon, and National
Capital Region say they know of someone who could help them use the Internet. There are
slightly more in rural areas than in urban areas, and as among the poor class D and very poor
class E who know someone who could access the Internet on their behalf. The percentages of
proxy Internet users increase with age – 84% of those aged 25-44, and all of those aged 45 and
above say they know someone who could access the Internet for them.
[TABLE 4]
How often they go online?
Thirty percent of Filipino Internet users are frequent users, or those who use the Internet
at least once a day (see Tables 5 and 6). Majority use the Internet less often, with 33% who are
moderate users (using the Internet at least once per week), and 37% who are infrequent users
(using the Internet less than once per week).
Internet users who are from higher socio-economic class, who are college graduates, and
have computer and Internet connection in the household tend to use the Internet more frequently
than other socio-demographic groups. About three-fifths of classes ABC are frequent users, in
contrast to majorities of classes D and E who use the internet less often. Two-fifths of the college
graduates are frequent users, compared to about one-fourth of the less educated who are also
daily users. About half of Internet users in households who own computers and 54% of those in
households with Internet connection are also frequent users.
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
10
Although area, locale, gender, age were found to be not statistically associated with
frequency of Internet use, some patterns on the proportions of daily users were noticeable.
Internet users from Metro Manila, Visayas and Mindanao are more likely than those in Balance
Luzon to use the Internet frequently. Urban users are less likely than rural users to use the
Internet on a daily basis. About half of those aged 35-44 and 55 and above are daily Internet
users.
[TABLES 5 AND 6]
What do they do online?
The research tested for nine Internet activities that are classified into five broad
categories based on the typology used by the Internet in Britain report: 1) social networking
(online social networking like Facebook, use Twitter); 2) information seeking or learning (to get
news, get health information); 3) creativity and production (blogging, share own photos, videos
and stories); 4) entertainment and leisure (play online games), and 5) commercial activity (online
purchasing).
Social networking is by far the single most popular online activity among adult Filipino
Internet users, with about nine in ten (89%) have ever used online social networking sites like
Facebook or Friendster (see Figure 2). This is followed in distant second by 44% who share
things that they themselves created like photos, videos or artwork (presumably through online
social networking sites), and 40% to get news or information on current events. Thirty-seven
percent of Internet users go online to get general health information, another 37% play online
games, and 28% go online to get news on sensitive health topics. Least popular online activities
are: using Twitter, online purchasing and blogging.
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
11
As shown in Table 7, there are mixed socio-demographic patterns on the online activities
of Filipino Internet users.
Social networking. Online social networking is dominant across socio-demographic
groups. In particular, the percentages of Internet users who do online social networking are
higher in Balance Luzon, in urban areas, and those who had more than elementary education. In
comparison, Twitter use is only slightly more popular in Metro Manila and Mindanao, among
those from classes ABC, and those with more education. None of those who had some
elementary education or less use Twitter.
Information seeking/Learning. Three-fifths (62%) of Internet users in Mindanao go
online to get news. Internet users from middle-to-upper classes ABC are more likely than those
from lower socio-economic class to go online to either get news or get health information.
Women are also more likely than men to go online for news or health information. Education is
also a significant factor – none of those who had some elementary education or less go online to
get news or health information, compared to pluralities of those with more education that are
doing these. By age, 70% of those aged 55 and above go online for news, while there are slightly
more of the middle aged 35-44 who go online for information on health in general and sensitive
health information.
Creativity and production. About half of Internet users from Metro Manila and Balance
Luzon use the Internet to share things that they created themselves, compared to about one-third
in Visayas and Mindanao who are doing the same. The percentages of those who share online the
things they created personally created are higher among middle-to-upper classes ABC than those
from classes D and E, as well as among women than men. By age, about half of the 18-24 years
old and 57% of those aged 35-44 use the Internet to share things they personally created.
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
12
Entertainment and leisure. Playing online games is more popular among Internet users in
Visayas and Mindanao, with about half of users who say they are doing this. Playing online
games is also more popular among those from lower classes and younger people. Half of Internet
users from class E play online games, compared to 37% among class D and 29% among classes
ABC. About two-fifths of Internet users aged 18-24 and 25-34 also use the Internet to play
online games. None of the Internet users aged 55 and above have ever played online games.
Discussion and Conclusions
This paper investigates the pattern of Internet use in the Philippines using data gathered
from various representative surveys. Survey data show that while the percentage of Internet users
is still low, Internet use has grown considerably over the past few years. Access to computers
and Internet connection in the household has also started to increase. Yet, the findings indicate
that that pattern of Internet use in the Philippines is a pattern of digital divide, and this divide
could pose considerable barriers to the wider adoption and spread of Internet use among
Filipinos.
Digital divide, simply defined as the gap between those who haves and the have-nots, is
recognized to occur at two levels, namely, the “accessing divide” at the first level, and the “using
divide” at the second level (Attewell, 2001; Cheong, 2007; Chinn & Fairlie, 2004; Norris, 2001;
Zeng, 2011).
Accessing divide refers to the gap in access and ownership of computers, by and large the
most convenient way, and until recently, the only way to access the Internet. Data from the
Philippines is in parallel with previous findings that households in the provincial areas, from
rural localities, and belong to lower socio-economic classes are less likely to own a computer and
have Internet connection at home that households from the capital city, urban areas and upper-to-
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
13
middle classes (Attewell, 2001; Chinn & Fairlie, 2004; Norris, 2001). Philippine data also show
that ownership of computer in the household and Internet connection at home are strongly
associated with Internet use, such that those who have computers and Internet connection at
home are, on average, four to five times more likely to use the Internet for whatever purposes.
Those with computers and Internet connection at home also tend to use the Internet more
frequently (at least daily) than those who do not have access to computers and home Internet
connection.
Using divide, on the other hand, refers to the gap that exists between and among the users
themselves, particularly in the differences in the socio-demographic characteristics of the
Internet users. Results from the Philippines, to some extent, validate previous research on the
variations in Internet use across socio-demographic groups. One finding specifically related to
the Philippine context is that the adults in households with family members who are working
overseas are twice more likely to use the Internet than those without overseas worker in the
household. For the families left in the country, the Internet has become a more convenient and
cheaper means of communicating with their family members abroad. Indeed, it is now easier to
communicate with people using Internet applications such as web chats, online video calls, or
even posting photos and pictures through Facebook.
Internet use is higher in the NCR than in provincial areas and in urban areas than in rural
areas, confirming Garner and Oswald’s (2001) findings of a north/south divide in Internet use.
Internet use is also higher among those from upper-to-middle classes ABC than those from lower
classes D and E, and the more educated (Choi, 2008; Gardner & Oswald, 2001; Howard, Rainie
& Jones, 2001; Norris, 2001; Smith et al, 2008). Internet users from classes ABC are also more
likely to use the Internet more frequently than those from classes D and E.
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
14
Filipino men and women are to be equally likely to use the Internet, supporting the
findings of Jackson, Ervin, Gardner, & Schmitt (2001) and Smith et al (2008). It should be noted,
however, that other studies show contradictory findings, reporting higher Internet use among
men than women (Bimber, 2000; Choi, 2008; Gardner & Oswald, 2001; Howard, Rainie and
Jones, 2001; Norris, 2001; Ono & Zavodny, 2003). Nevertheless, it has been also been predicted
by that the gender divides in Internet use are likely to narrow down as the educational and
income status of women improve.
The youth are the key drivers of Internet use in the Philippines, such that while half of
those aged 18-24 are Internet users, a small 2% of those aged 55 and above also use the Internet.
This pattern clearly validates stereotype of younger individuals as bigger Internet user than the
older individuals (Chinn & Fairlie, 2004; Choi, 2008; Gardner & Oswald, 2001; Howard, Rainie
& Jones, 2001; Norris, 2001; Smith et al, 2008)
While Internet use among adult Filipinos is still low, survey data also indicate that
majority of the non-users are proxy Internet users who could ask mostly their family members
and their friends to access the Internet on their behalf. As Internet use is lower in the provinces,
in rural areas and among the lower classes, it follows, therefore, that the proportions of Internet
proxy users are higher in the provincial areas than in NCR, in rural areas than in urban areas,
among the lower classes D and E than the upper classes ABC, and among the elderly aged 45
and above than the youth aged 18-24.
As to the patterns of what Filipino Internet users do online, online social networking is
largely the most popular online activity, and its usage hardly vary across socio-demographic
groups. In contrast, use of Twitter is still low, but its usage is more popular among those from
higher socio-economic classes and the more educated. The Philippine results are consistent with
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
15
previous research that younger Internet users tend to do more fun activities such as playing
online games while older people do more information seeking/learning activities particularly
getting news on current events (Howard Rainie & Jones, 2002; Madden & Rainie, 2003).
Contrary to findings in the United States, however, Filipino women are more likely than the men
to use the Internet as an information utility, particularly getting news on current events and
health information. The more educated and those from higher socio-economic classes also tend
to go online to access news and health information.
The paper expects to contribute to a greater understanding of the current trends in Internet
use among Filipinos nationwide. By showing that there are differences in Internet use and access
across socio-demographic groups nationwide, the author is optimistic that the data presented here
would be considered in the efforts of the government and private sector to bridge the digital
divide by focusing on those who do not have access to or do not use the Internet – those in the
provinces, the rural areas, the poor and lower income individuals. It is also encouraged that there
should be a continuous and regular monitoring or tracking of the patterns of Internet use and
access in the country. Representative surveys are one of the qualitative approaches in monitoring
Internet use, and should be considered as an alternative source of data on Internet use.
Government data on Internet use are not regularly updated, and not readily available to the
public. In fact, the Internet usage data presented in this paper was found in online databases, such
as the World Bank Data (http://data.worldbank.org) and UNdata (http://data.un.org). Further
research on the online activities of Filipino Internet users is also strongly encouraged. Recent
news on Facebook-related killings and criminal activities calls for research on the social impacts
of the Internet, particularly online social networking.
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
16
More importantly, the findings discussed here underscore the challenges in conducting
public opinion research in the Philippines using the Internet. Advances in information,
communication and technology have lead to newer techniques and methods in conducting
surveys (Evans & Mathur, 2005), and the use of the Internet to gather survey data is expected to
be the dominant method of survey research methodology replacing the traditional research
methods such as mail surveys and face-to-face interviews (Maronick, 2009). Certainly, new
survey methodologies, like telephone surveys and online surveys are more practical alternative
methods than personal surveys, and have faster turn-around time for urgent issues. The results
discussed here, however, indicate that the use of the Internet to conduct surveys in the
Philippines has limited application at this time. Firstly, basic access to computers and the
Internet, and Internet use are still low. Secondly, there are important disparities in Internet access
and use across socio-demographic groups, to the extent that Internet population in the Philippines
is “demographically skewed” (Evans & Mathur): Internet access and use is more prevalent in
Metro Manila, in urban areas, among the higher-income and more educated. The proliferation of
Internet shops around the country may ease the lack of access to computers and the Internet, and
increase Internet penetration rate, and to some extent bridge the gap between the users and nonusers but there are still problems to be addressed. For example, there is the issue of maintaining
the confidentiality and privacy of the respondents to online survey, as in most Internet shops,
only a small board panel separates the users from each other. Another issue is the question of
whether or not the Internet users are willing at all to devote a portion of their computer rental
time (usually costs PhP 15.00 per 30 minutes) to answer surveys.
#
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
17
References
Akman, I., & Mishra, A. (2010). Gender, age and income differences in internet usage among
employees in organizations. Computers in Human Behavior.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2009.12.007
Asian Institute of Journalism and Communication. (2009). Survey on Internet access and use by
Filipino children (Final Report for UNICEF). Retrieved from
www.aijc.com.ph/survey_internet_access.pdf
Attewel, P. (2001). The first and second digital divides. Sociology of Education, 74(3), 252-259.
Bimber, B. (2000). Measuring the gender gap on the Internet. Social Science Quarterly, 81(3),
868-876.
Cheong, P.H. (2007). Gender and perceived Internet efficacy: Examining secondary digital
divide issues in Singapore. Women’s Studies in Communication, 30(2), 205-228.
Chinn, M. D., & Fairlie, R.W. (2004). The determinants of the global digital divide: A crosscountry analysis of computer and Internet penetration. Oxford Economic Papers, 59(1).
Choi, A. (2008). Internet in Singapore: Findings from a national survey. Observatorio (OBS)
Journal, 6, 151-168. doi: 1646-5954/ERC123483/2008 151
Dutton, W.H., Helsper, E.J., and Gerber, M.M. (2009). The Internet in Britain: 2009. Oxford
Internet Institute: University of Oxford.
Estimated Internet users (2011). Retrieved August 1, 2011 from United Nations Data Retrieval
System http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?q=Internet&d=ITU&f=ind1Code%3aI4212
Evans, J.R. & Mathur, A. (2005). The value of online surveys. Internet Research, 15(2), 195219.
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
18
Fang, X., & Yen, D. C. (2006). Demographics and behavior of Internet users in China.
Technology in Society, 28, 363–387.
Gardner, J., & Oswald, A. (2001). Internet use: The digital divide. Retrieved from
www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/economics/staff/faculty/oswald/bsago12.pdf
Guerrero, L.L., Labucay, I.D., Sandoval, G.A., & Mangahas, M.K. (2009). Where’s a great place
to work: A global analysis from the perspective of a labor-exporting country. In M.
Haller, R. Jowell & T.W. Smith (Eds.), The International Social Survey Programme
1984-2009: Charting the globe. Oxon, England: Routledge.
Hargittai, E. (2008). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network
sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 276–297. doi:10.1111/j.10836101.2007.00396.x
Hargittai, E., & Hinnant, A. (2008). Digital inequality: Differences in young adults' use of the
Internet. Communication Research, 35(5), 602-621.
Ho, A.L. (2009, April 12). Filipinos get sucked into worldwide web. Philippine Daily Inquirer.
Retrieved from http://technology.inquirer.net/infotech/infotech/view/20090412198910/Filipinos-get-sucked-into-worldwide-web
Horrigan, J. B. (2007). A typology of information and communication technology users.
Retrieved from The Pew Internet & American Life Project
www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/.../PIP_ICT_Typology.pdf.pdf
Howard, P. N., Rainie, L., & Jones, S. (2002). Days and Nights on the Internet. In B. Wellman &
C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The Internet in Everyday Life. Oxford: Blackwell.
Hüsing, T. & Selhofer, H. (2002). The Digital Divide Index. A measure of social inequalities in
the adoption of ICT. In S. Wrycza, (Ed.), Proceedings of the 10th European conference
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
19
on information systems ECIS 2002: Information systems and the future of the digital
economy (pp 1273-1286). Gdansk: ECIS.
Internet users (2011). Retrieved August 1, 2011 from World Bank Data
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER
Jackson, L. A., Ervin, K. S., Gardner, P. D., & Schmitt, N. (2001). Gender and the Internet:
Women communicating and men searching. Sex Roles, 44 (5/6), 363-379.
Madden, M., & Rainie, L. (2003). America's online pursuits: The changing picture of who's
online and what they do. Retrieved from Pew Internet & American Life Project
http://www.pewinternet.org/~/media//Files/Reports/2003/PIP_Online_Pursuits_Final.PD
F.PDF
Maronick, T.J. (2009). The role of the Internet in survey research: Guidelines for researchers and
experts. Journal of Global Business and Technology, 5(1), 18-31.
Minges, M., Magpantay, E., Firth, L. and Kelly, T. (2002). Pinoy Internet: Philippines case
study. Retrieved from the International Telecommunication Union’s (ITU) Internet Case
Study webpage: www.itu.int/asean2001/reports/material/PHL%20CS.pdf
Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic Engagement, Information Poverty, and the Internet
Worldwide. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Ono, H., and Zavodny, M. (2003). Gender and the Internet. Social Science Quarterly 84(1):111121.
Ono, H., and Zavodny, M. (2007). Digital inequality: A five country comparison using
microdata. Social Science Research, 36, 1135-1155.
Smith, P., Smith, N., Sherman, K., Kriplani, K., Goodwin, I., Bell, A., & Crothers, C. (2008).
The Internet: Social and demographic impacts in Aotearoa New Zealand. Observatorio
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
(OBS*) Journal, 6, 307-330. Retrieved from
http://obs.obercom.pt/index.php/obs/article/viewArticle/234
Warschauer, M. (2003). Technology and social inclusion. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Zeng, F. (2011). College students perception of the second-level digital divide: An empirical
analysis. Asian Social Science, 7 (6), 42-50. doi: 10.5539/ass.v7n6p42
Zhang, Y. (2005). Age, gender, and Internet attitudes among employees in the business world.
Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 1-10.
20
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
21
Tables and Figures
Table 1. Ownership of Computers in the Household, Philippines, 1997 to 2010: Percent of
Households with Computers
‘97
‘98
‘99
‘00
‘01
‘02
‘03
‘04
‘05
‘06
‘07
‘08
‘09
‘10
3
4
5
5
5
7
7
5
6
6
7
10
11
12
Metro Manila
Balance Luzon
15
2
19
2
22
3
24
2
25
2
29
3
28
4
18
5
14
7
13
5
16
7
20
10
20
13
20
14
Visayas
1
2
3
4
2
3
3
2
3
4
5
7
6
8
Mindanao
2
0
1
1
2
2
1
1
3
5
4
6
7
6
Urban
Rural
7
0
7
0
8
1
10
1
12
1
12
1
13
1
11
1
9
2
8
2
10
3
14
5
17
5
18
6
Classes ABC
Class D
20
1
27
1
33
2
39
2
45
2
47
4
46
4
22
4
23
6
23
6
27
7
33
10
42
12
43
13
Class E
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
2
3
3
Total
Philippines
Area
Locale
Class
Source: Social Weather Stations, Philippines, 1997 to 2010
Table 2. Internet Access in the Household, Philippines, 1998 to 2010: Percent of Households
with Internet Connection
Total
Philippines
Area
‘98
‘99
‘00
‘01
‘02
‘03
‘04
‘05
‘06
‘07
‘08
‘09
‘10
2
1
2
2
3
3
2
2
2
2
4
4
6
9
8
11
12
14
18
10
7
7
7
11
11
14
Metro Manila
Balance Luzon
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
2
1
2
4
5
7
Visayas
0
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
3
Mindanao
0
0
0
0
1
0
0
1
2
1
1
3
1
2
6
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
Locale
Urban
Rural
Class
22
‘98
‘99
‘00
‘01
‘02
‘03
‘04
‘05
‘06
‘07
‘08
‘09
‘10
3
2
4
5
6
7
5
4
3
4
7
8
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
2
13
12
18
21
24
29
10
10
10
13
19
21
29
Classes ABC
Class D
0
0
0
0
1
1
2
2
2
2
4
5
6
Class E
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
Source: Social Weather Stations, Philippines, 1997 to 2010
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
23
Figure 1. Percent of Filipino Adults Who Use the Internet, 2006 to 2011*
Source: Social Weather Stations, Philippines, 2006 to 2011
Question wording: 2006 to 2010: “Do you use a computer at your workplace, at school, at home, or anywhere else
at least on an occasional basis? IF YES, Do you ever go online to access the internet or the World Wide Web or
send and receive email?” 2011: “Do you ever go online to access the internet or the World Wide Web or send and
receive email?”
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
24
Table 3. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Internet Users, Philippines, March 2011: Percent
of Internet Users and Gamma Associations of Socio-Demographic Characteristics
Total Philippines
Area
Locale
Socio-economic class
Education
Gender
Age
Civil status
Overseas Worker in the HH
Computer in the HH
Internet Access in the HH
Work Status
Occupation
Metro Manila
Balance Luzon
Visayas
Mindanao
Urban
Rural
Classes ABC
Class D
Class E
No formal education/Some elementary
Up to elementary graduate
Up to high school graduate
College graduate/Post-college
Men
Women
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55 and above
Unmarried
Married
These is/are
None
There is
None
There is
None
Working
Not working
Hired Workers
Clerical/Administrative/Sales
Managers
Professionals/Technical
Non-agricultural skilled
Non-agricultural unskilled
Community workers
Employers and Self-employed
Non-agricultural entrepreneurs
Agricultural operators
Internet Users (%)
19
29
20
20
12
26
11
44
23
7
2
7
26
49
21
18
55
24
13
11
2
34
13
31
18
60
15
73
16
17
22
49
76
73
49
22
19
16
12
16
6
Gamma values
.22***
.47***
.59***
-.71***
.08 ns
.65***
.57***
.34**
.79***
.86***
-.16*
.30***
Source: Social Weather Stations, Philippines, March 2011
Question wording: “Do you ever go online to access the internet or the World Wide Web or send and receive
email?”
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, ns: not statistically significant
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
25
Table 4. Socio-Demographic Characteristics of Proxy Internet Use, June 2011: Percent of NonInternet Users Who Could Ask Other People To Use the Internet for Them
Proxy Internet Users (%)
Total Philippines
Area
Locale
Socio-economic class
Gender
Age
70
Metro Manila
64
Balance Luzon
71
Visayas
82
Mindanao
50
Urban
66
Rural
72
Classes ABC
66
Class D
79
Class E
75
Men
70
Women
70
18-24
40
25-34
50
35-44
84
45-54
100
55 and above
100
Source: Social Weather Stations, Philippines, June 2011
Question wording: “If you need to use the Internet to send/receive an email or do something using the Internet, do
you know someone who could access the Internet and do this for you? And who could you ask for help in accessing
for you? (SHOWCARD) (ALLOW MULTIPLE RESPONSE)”
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
26
Table 5. Frequency of Internet Use, Philippines, March 2011
Total Philippines
Area
Locale
Socio-economic class
Education
Gender
Age
Computer in the HH
Internet Access in the HH
Metro Manila
Balance Luzon
Visayas
Mindanao
Urban
Rural
Classes ABC
Class D
Class E
No formal education/Some elementary
Up to elementary graduate
Up to high school graduate
College graduate/Post-college
Men
Women
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55 and above
There is
None
There is
None
At least
daily
%
At last
weekly
%
Less than
weekly
%
30
37
24
35
35
28
37
58
28
19
22
28
25
42
33
28
30
24
51
20
48
47
23
54
24
33
29
39
25
30
35
25
13
36
27
0
33
35
29
31
35
36
29
32
29
39
29
34
27
34
37
34
37
40
35
36
38
29
35
53
78
39
40
30
36
38
38
47
17
51
13
24
43
19
42
Source: Social Weather Stations, Philippines, June 2011
Question wording: “Do you ever go online to access the internet or the World Wide Web or send and receive email?
IF INTERNET USER: Overall, how often do you use the Internet? Do you use the Internet … (SHOW CARD)?” [A
few times a day, At least once a day, 3-5 days a week, 1-2 days a week, Every other weeks, Less often]
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
27
Table 6. Gamma Association on Frequency of Internet Use, March 2011
Internet Access in the Household
Computer in the Household
Socio-economic class
Education
Age
Civil status
Locale
Overseas Worker in the Household
Occupation
Area
Work Status
Gender
Gamma values
.50***
.40***
.36**
-.21*
-.02 ns
-.05 ns
-.06 ns
-.03 ns
.11 ns
.00 ns
-.32 ns
.06 ns
Source: Social Weather Stations, Philippines, March 2011
*p < .05, **p < .01, ***p < .001, ns: not statistically significant
Figure 2. Internet Activities of Internet Users, Philippines, March 2011*
Source: Social Weather Stations, Philippines, 2006 to 2011
Question wording: “We’re interested in the kinds of things you do on the Internet. Please just tell me whether you
ever do each activity in the Internet, or not. Do you ever... [MENTION ACTIVITY]? (SHUFFLE CARDS)” [Go
online or to the Internet to get news or information about current events or politics, Use an online social networking
sites like Facebook or Friendster, Buy things online or in the Internet, such as books, clothing, or music, Look
online or in the Internet for information on health, dieting, or physical fitness, Look for information online or in the
Internet about a health topic that’s hard to talk about, like drug use, sexual health, or depression, Create or work on
your own online journal or blog, Use Twitter, Play online games like DotA, Ragnarok,World of Warcraft, Final
Fantasy XI, Gaia, Second Life or Habbo Hotel, Share something online that you created yourself,such as your own
artwork, photos, stories or videos]
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
28
Table 7. Internet Activities by Socio-Demographic Character tics of Internet Users, Philippines, March 2011
Social networking
Locale
Socio-economic
class
Education
Creativity and production
Entertainment Commercial
and leisure
activities
Get news
Get info.
on
health,
dieting
Get info. on
a sensitive
health topic
Share
something
online
Create or
work on
own blog
Play online
games
Buy things
online
15
40
37
28
44
5
37
7
86
20
41
49
33
51
10
38
5
Balance Luzon
93
12
36
37
32
46
2
29
3
Visayas
85
12
30
28
18
35
7
47
8
Mindanao
86
24
62
30
19
38
5
49
16
Urban
93
15
41
38
30
44
4
36
4
Rural
78
17
37
35
21
42
8
39
12
Classes ABC
91
21
51
48
42
59
8
29
12
Class D
89
15
39
37
28
42
5
37
6
Class E
91
8
29
24
6
37
4
50
4
No formal educ/Some elem.
73
0
0
0
0
51
0
22
0
Up to elementary graduate
89
21
33
36
21
52
7
52
0
Up to high school graduate
90
13
37
37
26
36
5
35
7
Online
social
networking
Use
Twitter
89
Metro Manila
Total Philippines
Area
Information seeking/Learning
INTERNET USE IN THE PHILIPPINES
Social networking
Gender
Age
29
Information seeking/Learning
Creativity and production
Entertainment Commercial
and leisure
activities
Get news
Get info.
on
health,
dieting
Get info. on
a sensitive
health topic
Share
something
online
Create or
work on
own blog
Play online
games
Buy things
online
18
49
40
35
54
5
37
9
88
16
36
33
24
48
6
40
4
Women
91
14
43
42
32
38
4
34
9
18-24
93
18
43
37
29
46
5
44
8
25-34
87
18
33
38
21
35
8
39
5
35-44
90
13
52
47
44
57
4
34
8
45-54
75
0
21
22
16
39
0
15
2
55 and above
100
17
70
30
30
30
0
0
0
Online
social
networking
Use
Twitter
College graduate/Post-coll
89
Men
Source: March 2011 Social Weather Survey
Question wording: “We’re interested in the kinds of things you do on the Internet. Please just tell me whether you ever do each activity in the Internet, or not. Do you
ever... [MENTION ACTIVITY]? (SHUFFLE CARDS)” [Go online or to the Internet to get news or information about current events or politics, Use an online social
networking sites like Facebook or Friendster, Buy things online or in the Internet, such as books, clothing, or music, Look online or in the Internet for information on
health, dieting, or physical fitness, Look for information online or in the Internet about a health topic that’s hard to talk about, like drug use, sexual health, or depression,
Create or work on your own online journal or blog, Use Twitter, Play online games like DotA, Ragnarok,World of Warcraft, Final Fantasy XI, Gaia, Second Life or
Habbo Hotel, Share something online that you created yourself,such as your own artwork, photos, stories or videos]