These are changing times. The impact of the
ever-changing technological landscape has forced individuals to adapt to
a society that is constantly consuming technological devices and
services in ways never seen before.
Some
people, especially in the education sector, see this revolution as a
promise land where every gadget is a potentiator for the
teaching-learning process (shouldn't it be processes?). In this idyllic
view, people who are consumers of technologies tend to promote what is
trendy, from iPads to Facebook, as the snake oil that solves all
education-related problems. Rarely is it that they stop and analyze
limitations that sometimes become show-stoppers, such as the
tech-divide, terms of service that contradict student privacy policies,
or technological discrimination.
Interestingly,
in my country, educators tend to be the least flexible concerning new
technologies. Most of them, for example, cannot distinguish the
difference between an .odt and a .PNG file. Driven by either
recalcitrance or inertia, they have not been able to embrace the
migration from MS Office to LibreOffice, a process that started in
2010. And now that MS Office was removed, they are crying in
desperation.
This phenomenon is not new; many
users believe that productivity is equal to procedural automation.
Such idea rests, however, on the false assumption that software is
unchanging. They forgot that Microsoft actually changed the Office
interface in 2007 and they had to adapt. Now that they have to use
LibreOffice, they claim that adaptation to an interface that they used
before 2007 is way too difficult.
I suspect
that the problem has never been the interface, nor is the productivity
assumption. The problem at the core is the rejection of FLOSS because
of fear or hatred, a phenomenon that I call FLOSSophobia.
While
some people will sneer and dismiss my thought as a hyperbole, there is
plenty of evidence to categorize this recalcitrance as the product of a
hegemony with political an economic power to propagate both fear (FUD)
and sheer hatred toward FLOSS. They resort to ridicule, insulting
remarks, and unproven claims to slow down the adoption of free/open
source software.
I have seen it many times.
"Linux is a cancer". "Open sauce". "Linuxtard". I even remember the
teacher who did not bring a laptop for her presentation and, when I
offered her my Linux netbook, she rejected it as if I had presented her
something illegal. She tried to use an old Windows computer instead
but, when the computer failed, she ended up displaying her presentation
with my Linux netbook.
Clearly, this
teacher's position was not based on ignorance or lack of expertise
because she knew Linux existed and all she had to do was to display
slides. Her refusal was due to indoctrination: she had learned that
Linux and non-Microsoft office suites had to be rejected.
The
case of my colleagues is similar. They think they are computer
literate because they use MS Office (despite knowing nothing about file
formats). With LibreOffice, their inconsistencies manifest and they
feel self-conscious, exposed, and incompetent. They both hate and fear
feeling this way, so they cling to that which makes them feel validated
and, in so doing, they assume a rejection discourse on FLOSS.
No
doubt; FLOSSophobia is a new reality that the information era has
brought about. From the social standpoint, there is virtually no
difference in the mechanics of FLOSSophobia and, say, xenophobia or
homophobia. The only difference rests on the fact that society is still
oblivious to the adverse consequences of FLOSSophobia. However, a day
will come in which this phenomenon will be subject of analysis, like
Cyber-bullying, sexting, and other realities that ICTs have put onto the
table.
