One thing is, what we think people need and another is what they really need. It will be more relevant to use so-called LSM's - Lifestyle measures while evaluating the importance of the internet. That said how do we explain the resident of the village with no clean drinking water, buying a cell phone or kitchen appliance? or a mother paying for her son's education tutoring, even when she goes hungry? A farmer investing in cattle before improving his house? These are all facts and I am sure many of us have heard these stories. One thing is what we perceive and another is what people really need.
Btw by working with the local communities, providing resources, training and constant assistance, we also seem to encourage them to see the relevance of an Internet connection. We hope to prove that most of our beneficiaries will be willing to continue paying for their Internet fees long after we have stopped paying for them. According to preliminary studies most of the families are ready to reprioritize their costs and maintain an internet connection. Because of the high price barrier, they couldn't afford the internet and now since they understand its role in their lives and its relevance, their priorities have changed.