There's a whole cottage industry of journalism based on criticism of "technology" that's predicated on the idea that "technology" == Silicon-Valley-based software/apps.
Of course, that has the downside of overlooking the fact that most problems are actually solved by technology, technology being what humans create to solve their problems.
Somehow, mRNA vaccines, which are to a large extent more high tech than most CRUD software developed in SV, isn't considered "technology".
I think it's specifically "tech", the shortened form, that refers to websites and apps in today's usage. "Technology", the full word includes medical advances, aerospace, innovative construction materials, solar panels, whatever.
What really drives me up the wall is when people call a library or a software framework or platform "a technology" (countable noun) in software. Like "Silverlight technology". I'm like "no, it's still a minor facet of information technology or computing technology, it's not a technology on its own".
Of course, that has the downside of overlooking the fact that most problems are actually solved by technology, technology being what humans create to solve their problems.
Somehow, mRNA vaccines, which are to a large extent more high tech than most CRUD software developed in SV, isn't considered "technology".