Theorizing Digital Divides

Massimo Ragnedda, Glenn W. Muschert, Massimo Ragnedda, Glenn W. Muschert

• Publisher: Taylor & Francis
• Year: 2017
• Print ISBN: 9780367890254
• eBook ISBN: 9781315455310
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Social Sciences
• Subtopic: Sociology
• Index: Social Sciences

Although discussion of the digital divide is a relatively new phenomenon, social inequality is a deeply entrenched part of our current social world and is now reproduced in the digital sphere. Such inequalities have been described in multiple traditions of social thought and theoretical approaches. To move forward to a greater understanding of the nuanced dynamics of digital inequality, we need the theoretical lenses to interpret the meaning of what has been observed as digital inequality.

This volume examines and explains the phenomenon of digital divides and digital inequalities from a theoretical perspective. Indeed, with there being a limited amount of theoretical research on the digital divide so far, Theorizing Digital Divides seeks to collect and analyse different perspectives and theoretical approaches in analysing digital inequalities, and thus propose a nuanced approach to study the digital divide.

Exploring theories from diverse perspectives within the social sciences whilst presenting clear examples of how each theory is applied in digital divide research, this book will appeal to scholars and undergraduate and postgraduate students interested in sociology of inequality, digital culture, Internet studies, mass communication, social theory, sociology, and media studies.

Section 1

Using classical social theories to understand digital divide

1The sociology of Simmel and digital divides

Information, value, exchange, and sociation in the networked environment

Glenn W. Muschert and Ryan Gunderson

Introduction

Digital divides have been examined from a relatively narrow range of theoretical frameworks. As digital divides are forms of stratification, it is surprising that the wealth of sociological perspectives on inequality have to date been poorly applied to the topic. Indeed, it has been rather recent that even the classical sociological traditions have been systematically applied as lenses through which to interpret digital divides (e.g., see Witte & Mannon, 2010; Ragnedda & Muschert, 2013, 2015; Ragnedda, 2017). Following Marx and Muschert’s (2007, 2009) formulation of a sociology of information drawing from the thought of Georg Simmel, our aim is to explore how a Simmelian framework can be of use for the study of the digital divide. Simmel wrote about the nature and changing role of information in modern society in “The Sociology of Secrecy and Secret Societies” (1906; 1908/1950, pp. 307–376). Connecting the latter essay with insights explicated from The Philosophy of Money (1900/1978), we conceive of information as a form of currency/medium of exchange. Those with greater capacity to create, understand, control, and utilize information are relatively empowered, in relation to those with lesser capacity. As a form of currency or exchange, information has the unique property that, as Erving Goffman (1969) noted, it is the only form of property that need not be diminished in value by being shared.

Although we focus on two of Simmel’s works below—his chapter on secrecy (1908/1950, pp. 307–376) and treatise on money (1900/1978)—it may be helpful to briefly comment on Simmel’s sociology and influence. The immediate attraction of Simmel (1950) for the study of the digital divide, and digital interaction in general, is his conception of society as “the name for a number of individuals, connected in interaction” (p. 10). From dyadic interactions to large-scale institutions, society is nothing more than continual interactions between individuals that “crystalize” into autonomous forms, which in turn condition, and are conditioned by, individuals. The primary task of the sociologist is to abstract from the transitory, fluid, and diverse concrete content of social life mediated by interests, movements, drives, and purposes (Simmel, 1908/1950, pp. 40–41) to decipher common “forms of sociation,” a “systematically ambiguous” (Oakes, 1980, p. 10) concept that Coser (1977, p. 181) argued is nearly synonymous with social structure. Social forms—such as conflict, cooperation, exchange, secrecy, friendship, and subordination and superordination—are the unconsciously or consciously created and accepted frameworks that provide order, coherence, and meaning in social life and constrain and enable individual action.

Although Simmel was a nonconforming “stranger” in the academy who died without intellectual protégées (Coser, 1965; Levine, 1971), his thought has influenced the development of social theory. In the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, Simmel influenced thinkers as diverse as Georg Lukács, Martin Buber, Martin Heidegger, Robert E. Park, and Karl Mannheim (Coser, 1977, p. 199; Ashley & Orenstein, 2001, pp. 282f). In the mid-twentieth century, Simmel’s thought figures heavily in functionalist conflict theory (Coser, 1956) and exchange theory (Homans, 1958; Blau, 1964). His insights have experienced a “revival” since the 1970s (e.g., Levine, 1971; Frisby, 1981), informing areas from urban sociology (e.g., Bouchet, 1998) to postmodern theory (e.g., Weinstein & Weinstein, 2013). It is our contention that Simmel’s ideas provide fruitful insights for the study of the digital divide as well.

In what follows, we first outline a framework for a sociology of information, as formulated by Marx and Muschert (2007, 2009). Following, pertinent themes from Simmel’s works on secrecy (1906; 1908/1950, pp. 307–376) and the money economy (1900/1978) are summarized. We then develop a series of information-money analogies. Most importantly, we argue that information is an object of value whose flows are similar to that of money and that the control of information, like money, acts as a stratification resource. Our aim is primarily exploratory, and intended to open up a further dialogue regarding the relevancy of Simmel’s ideas to the study of digital divides. As such, this piece is necessarily conceptual and offers sensitizing principles to be applied and tested in further empirical study. In particular, we offer ideas for applying Marx and Muschert’s (2009) sociology of information, rooted in Simmel, as a point of departure for defining information as something of value and as a medium of exchange (or something which can be circulated via exchange).

The sociology of information

Information and flows of information are crucial aspects of the network society, and may fruitfully be linked to Simmel’s concepts of information and value, as suggested by Marx and Muschert (2009). The role of information in society is governed not only by technological and economic limitations, but also by social norms, including both formal (e.g., laws and policies) and informal (e.g., etiquette, ethical principles, and standards of decency) sets of expectations and controls for how information should be managed. Such a framework has already been developed, as follows in Table 1.1.

These principles refer primarily to sociological (and behavioral) aspects of information handling, and as related to digital divide studies would focus more on the human dimensions of digital inequalities than on the technical and economical. The field of digital divide studies is indeed the domain of sociologists, a discipline which includes a long-standing endeavor to understand the dynamics of deviance and social control, as specifically applied to information in the digital sphere. The sociological concepts of norms, deviance, and social control become crucial to digital divide studies, as indeed these have often been identified as fundamental to the entire field of sociology (see Gibbs, 1981). There is a need for nuanced articulation of the mechanisms/social practices behind the creation and (re)definition of social norms related to information, and this need extends way beyond the formal, and into the informal sphere. There is also a need to examine the transgression of such norms (which in itself helps to define that the norm exists, and is especially instructive in cases where the norms are unwritten and informal). Finally, there is great potential in examining the varying forms of control responses which emerge as rule transgressions are identified.

Table 1.1 Elements of a sociology of information

1Operationally defines and keeps distinct (yet notes relations among) a family of concepts encompassing personal, group, and organizational information—e.g., privacy and publicity, public and private, personal and impersonal data, surveillance and surveillance neutralization, secrecy, confidentiality, anonymity, pseudo-anonymity, identifiability, and confessions.

2Identifies the characteristics of the data gathering/blocking and communication techniques—both those inherent and socially determined by policy and practices.

3Identifies the stated goals and latent consequences.

4Identifies role relationships and other social structural aspects including types of borders and directional flows and content of information and information accessibility (reciprocity and symmetry).

5Identifies spatial and locational aspects.

6Identifies the type of information involved.

7Identifies the form of the data.

8Identifies cultural themes and symbols which provide meaning and direction in telling us how information gathering and communication should be judged and how we should experience it.

9Identifies the social process aspects.

Source: Marx & Muschert, 2007, p. 382.

Note: Marx & Muschert (2007, p. 384) also offer tested (or testable) hypotheses which apply the sociology of information framework to the sub-field of surveillance studies. Such an application is illustrative of how this framework can be applied to digital divide studies.

As the sociology of the network society emerged in the past quarter century (see e.g., Castells, 2000; van Dijk, 2012), Simmel is often cited as (at least) suggesting the possibility of studying social challenges arising from the expansion of digital networked communications technologies. In his broad examinations of social forms in a period of rapid social change, Simmel offered sensitizing principles that remind contemporary researchers to be mindful of the effects of (post)modernization, organizational forms, economic relations and transitions, and qualities of (inter)personal experience in the networked world. New social forms have emerged as digital technologies developed along with the network society. One might consider the utility of Simmel’s principles and the sociology of information framework presented here as useful in examining digital forms in the network society, such as email and social media platforms. For example, the displacement of face-to-face relations as electronic communications expand is one aspect of social interactions fundamentally altered in the network society. More broadly, however, is the need to understand with precision the social and behavioral aspects of such changes. Digital divide studies have brought attention to the social inequalities in the digital sphere, which may fruitfully be studied via Simmel’s ideas about the control of information and the money economy.

Simmel on secrecy and money

Secrecy and information

Like most of his work, Simmel’s (1906; 1908/1950, pp. 307–376) writing on secrecy covers a wide range of topics, including lying, secret societies, marriage, and betrayal, and partakes in recurrent sweeps from the particular to the general to finding the general in the particular. Underneath this diversity, as Marx and Muschert (2009) stress, there is a buried sociological theory of information. We focus on his attention to how the function and flow of information changes in modern societies as well as secrecy as one form of information control.

As Simmel made clear, all social interaction depends on some degree of knowledge of the other individual or group. Yet complete knowledge and transparency would make social interaction impossible. Without full information in interaction, both parties must make assumptions about the other. Modern societies increase social differentiation and the number of social circles in which individuals belong (Simmel, 1908/1955). Unlike premodern societies in which individuals are more likely to know, and know more about, the others with whom they are interacting, modern urban societies are increasingly structured around interactions where trust based on objective interests replaces personal knowledge of the other. For example, membership in an interest group requires little personal knowledge of others for interaction. Or, daily interaction with strangers and mere acquaintances alters the meaning of confidence in and knowledge about others.

The function and role of information, and the deliberate withholding of information (the secret), change in modern societies. Simmel (1908/1950, p. 336) argued that secrecy increases in private affairs and decreases in public affairs. Yet, as Marx and Muschert (2009) point out, the rise and development of new information technologies has altered the role of and techniques for the deliberate withholding and control of information. Although logistical barriers may increase due to the huge volume of information available, “[i]n some ways there are now fewer secrets and we see the increased standardization of information” (Marx & Muschert, 2009, p. 220). The simultaneous increase in the availability of information, as well as an increased means (and standardization) to store and control it, via new information technologies, has altered the role of information as a form of value, exchange, and credit-worthiness. “For many individuals, property does not fully gain its significance with mere ownership, but only with the consciousness that others must do without it. … Moreover, since the others are excluded from the possession—particularly when it is very valuable—the converse suggests itself psychologically, namely, that what is denied to many must have special value” (Simmel, 1908/1950, p. 332)

Exchange and money

The Philosophy of Money (Simmel, 1900/1978) was both an analysis of the social implications of the rise of money as the predominant medium used in economic exchange (the money economy) and of the social characteristics of money. For Simmel, the increasingly widespread use of money as the medium for economic exchange not only altered the exchange form, but all forms of sociation. Money...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half-Title
• Series
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Introduction
• SECTION 1 Using classical social theories to understand digital divide
• SECTION 2 Associative and communicative perspectives
• SECTION 3 Critical and alternative perspectives
• Afterword: the state of digital divide theory
• Index