Home > Personal Finance > Financial Woes Plague the Smartphone Dependent

Comments 0 Comments

A fast-growing portion of Americans depend only on smartphones for Internet access, but nearly half of that group faces high rates of service interruption for financial reasons, according to a new study conducted by the Pew Research Center. This “smartphone dependent” group tends to be poor and non-White, Pew says, raising the possibility of a new kind of digital divide.

Pew’s survey found that 10% of Americans own a smartphone but do not have broadband at home, and 15% own a smartphone but say that they have a limited number of options for going online, aside from their cellphone. In all, 19% of American adults indicate that at least one of those conditions applies to them – making them dependent on smartphones for participating in the digital world. Critically, 13% of those with an annual household income of less than $30,000 per year are smartphone dependent, while just 1% of Americans from households earning more than $75,000 per year depend on their smartphones.

“For a fairly substantial proportion of the population, smartphones are definitely serving as a key utility for accessing all sorts of important information and services — and it’s quite clear that this access is often most tenuous or intermittent for those users who rely on that access the most,” said Aaron Smith, who co-authored the study.

The smartphone dependent group faces disconnection rates that are more than double the general population. Some 48% of the smartphone dependent group said they have had to cancel or suspend service due to “financial constraints,” compared to 21% of the general population, Pew found.

And those lower income households are far more likely to need smartphones to perform basic Internet tasks such as hunting for a job. Those earning less than $30,000 annually are nearly twice as likely to use a smartphone to look for information about a job — and more than four times as likely to use their phone to submit a job application, Pew said.

Trouble with smartphone bills occurs across economic and racial divides — some 23% of smartphone owners overall have had to cancel or suspend their service for a period of time because the cost was a financial hardship, Pew says, and 7% said they “frequently” experience higher-than-expected utility bills. Meanwhile, 15% said they frequently reach their data maximums.

But service interruptions are obviously a bigger hardship on those who rely on smartphones as their only connection to the Internet, a group Pew is dubbing “smartphone dependent.” Pew found that 12% of African Americans and 13% of Latinos are smartphone-dependent, compared with 4% of whites.

“Compared with smartphone owners who are less reliant on their mobile devices, the smartphone-dependent users are less likely to own some other type of computing device, less likely to have a bank account, less likely to be covered by health insurance, and more likely to rent or to live with a friend or family member rather than own their own home,” Pew found.

Part of Everyday Life

The results come at a time when overall smartphone ownership has exploded. Fully 64% of American adults own a smartphone, up from 31% in 2011, Pew says. Smartphones are taking over as the main tool for Internet access for many users.

Pew found that smartphones are now routinely used for critical everyday tasks:

  • 62% of smartphone owners have used their phone in the past year to look up information about a health condition.
  • 57% have used their phone to do online banking.
  • 44% have used their phone to look up real estate listings or other information about a place to live.
  • 43% to look up information about a job.
  • 40% to look up government services or information.
  • 30% to take a class or get educational content.
  • 18% to submit a job application.

With growing ranks of smartphone dependents, and the increased notion that smartphones are required for participation in the economy, do consumers need better protections from service interruption, as users of utilities like electricity and land-line telephone service do?

“As an organization we aren’t in the business of promoting particular policy outcomes so we don’t have a formal position on whether additional regulation is necessary to help that group …or what those regulations might look like,” Smith said. “But we do hope that these findings can help inform the broader debate that’s happening over broadband expansion and other digital divide issues, by giving a more thorough view into the day-to-day lives of that ‘smartphone dependent’ group.”

More Money-Saving Reads:

Image: iStock

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Certain credit cards and other financial products mentioned in this and other articles on Credit.com News & Advice may also be offered through Credit.com product pages, and Credit.com will be compensated if our users apply for and ultimately sign up for any of these cards or products. However, this relationship does not result in any preferential editorial treatment.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Our Owners

Credit.com is owned by Progrexion Holdings Inc. which is the owner and administrator of a number of business related to credit and credit repair, including CreditRepair.com, and eFolks. In addition, Progrexion also provides services to Lexington Law Firm as a third party provider. Despite being owned by Progrexion, it is not the role of the Credit.com editorial team to advocate the use of the company’s other services. In articles, reporters may mention credit repair as an option, for example, but we’ll also be sure to note the various alternatives to that service. Furthermore, you may see ads for credit repair services on Credit.com, but the editorial team isn’t responsible for the creation or implementation of those ads, anymore than reporters for the New York Times or Washington Post are responsible for the ads on their sites.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team