DOI: https://doi.org/10.17072/2078-7898/2021-2-260-269
The role of classic and modern concepts for the analysis of the digital divide factors
Natalia B. Kostina
Doctor of Sociology, Professor,
Professor of the Department of Theory and Sociology of Management
Ural Institute of Management (Branch) of Russian Presidential Academy
of National Economy and Public Administration,
66, 8 Marta st., Ekaterinburg, 620144, Russia;
e-mail: kostinanb30@gmail.com
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7188-0496
ResearcherID: AAM-9239-2021
Alexander A. Chizhov
Ph.D. Student of the Department of Theory and Sociology of Management
Ural Institute of Management (Branch) of Russian Presidential Academy
of National Economy and Public Administration,
66, 8 Marta st., Ekaterinburg, 620144, Russia;
e-mail: a.chizhov@egov66.ru
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4928-2160
ResearcherID: AAM-8206-2021
Based on the concept of explicit and latent potential of historical and sociological heritage for the study of modern types and forms of social inequality manifestation, the article examines the importance of ideas and theories developed by sociologists to identify the essence of the digital divide and its determinants. The article substantiates the author’s position that the approaches to the analysis of digital divide that are developing in modern sociology are based on theories and ideas presented in the classic and post-classic sociological heritage. The article provides the application of the main ideas of the formation and reproduction of social inequality by O. Comte (formation of categories of the patriciate and proletariat in society), K. Marx (influence of economic factors on reproduction of social inequality), G. Simmel (phenomenon of alienation in society), M. Weber (influence of social status on social inequality in society), E. Durkheim (influence of demographic factors on reproduction of social inequality), P. Bourdieu (formation of an aggregate of an individual’s capital as a factor of social inequality) and E. Giddens (influence of innovations, including information technologies, on the formation of social inequality) in the works of both foreign and Russian researchers devoted to the study of factors that determine the digital divide. In addition, the paper provides a classification of the considered concepts of social inequality and structuralizes ideas about the digital divide factors in accordance with the logic of this classification. The authors conclude that the sociological heritage contains both explicit and latent potential for understanding the phenomenon of digital divide.
Keywords: digital divide, explicit and latent potential, information technology, Internet, social inequality, concepts of digital divide.
References
Bourdieu, P. (2001). Prakticheskiy smysl [Practical meaning]. Saint Petersburg: Aleteya Publ., 562 p.
Bourdieu, P. (2007). Sotsiologiya sotsial’nogo prostranstva [Sociology of social space]. Saint Petersburg: Aleteya Publ., 288 p.
Chaudhuri, A., Flamm, K.S. and Horrigan J. (2005). An analysis of the determinants of Internet access. Telekommunikatsionnaya politika [Telecommunications Policy]. Vol. 29, iss. 9–10, pp. 731–755. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.telpol.2005.07.001
Darendorf, R. (2002). Sovremennyy sotsial’nyy konflikt. Ocherk politiki svobody [The modern social conflict. Essay on the politics of freedom]. Moscow: ROSSPEN Publ., 284 p.
Davies, K. and Moore, W. (1968). Some principles of stratification. Informatsionnyy byulleten’ SSA. Seriya «Perevody i referaty» [SSA Newsletter. Series «Translations and Abstracts»]. No. 6, pp. 194–212.
Durkheim, E. (1991). O razdelenii obschestvennogo truda. Metod sotsiologii [The Division of Labour in Society]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 575 p.
Fromm, E. (1992). [Marx’s concept of man]. Fromm E. Dusha cheloveka [Fromm E. The Heart of Man]. Moscow: Respublika Publ., pp. 375–414.
Giddens, E. (1999). Sotsiologiya [Sociology]. Moscow: Editorial URSS Publ., 703 p.
Graham, P. (2001). The digital dark ages: The knowledge economy as alienation. The Fibreculture Reader: Politics of a digital present. Melbourne, AU. Available at: https://eprints.qut.edu.au/12058/1/12058.pdf (accessed 07.04.2021).
Il’in, V.I. (2000). Sotsial’noe neravenstvo [Social inequality]. Moscow: IS RAS Publ., 280 p.
Marx, K. (1974). [Economic and philosophic manuscripts of 1844]. Marks K., Engels F. Sochineniya: v 50 t. [Marx K., Engels F. Works: in 50 vols]. Moscow: Politizdat Publ., vol. 42, pp. 41–174.
Middleton, K. and Chambers, V. (2010). Approaching digital equity: is wifi the new leveler? Informatsionnye tekhnologii i lyudi [Information Technology & People]. Vol. 23, iss. 1, pp. 4–22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/09593841011022528
Milner, H. (2015). Local + Digital + Scale: a mass movement for digital inclusion. Digital Divides. The New Challenges and Opportunities of e-Inclusion. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, pp. 217–246.
Orviska, M. and Hudson. J. (2009). Dividing or uniting Europe? Internet usage in the EU. Information Economics and Policy. Vol. 21, iss. 4, pp. 279–290. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infoecopol.2009.06.002
Panarin, A.N. (2002). [Max Weber vs Karl Marx]. Iskusheniye globalizmom [Temptation by globalism]. Moscow: Eksmo-press Publ., Available at: https://fil.wikireading.ru/35772 (accessed 01.04.2021).
Parsons, T. (1937). The structure of social action. New York: The Free Press of Glencoe, 830 p.
Ragnedda, M. (2017). The thivd digital divide: A weberian approach to digital inequalities. New York: Routledge, 136 p.
Saint-Simon, H. (2010). Katekhizis promyshlennikov, ili Sistema pozitivnoy politiki [Catechism of industrialists]. Moscow: Librokom Publ., 173 p.
Simmel, G. (2004). The Philosophy of money. London: Routledge, 616 p.
Sorokin, P.A. (1992). Chelovek. Tsivilizatsiya. Obschestvo [Human. Civilization. Society]. Moscow: Politizdat Publ., 543 p.
Sorokin, P.A. (2012). [Society, culture and personality: their structure and dynamics. General sociology system] Pitirim Sorokin: Novyye materialy k nauchnoy biografii: sb. nauch. tr. [Pitirim Sorokin: New materials for a scientific biography: coll. of scientific works]. Moscow: ISISS RAS Publ., pp. 12–81. Available at: http://inion.ru/site/assets/files/3747/2012_pitirim_sorokin.pdf (accessed 01.04.2021).
Vartanova, E.L. and Gladkova, A.A. (2021). [Digital divide, digital capital, digital inclusion: dynamics of theoretical approaches and political decisions]. Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 10. Zhurnalistika. Iss. 1, pp. 3–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30547/vestnik.journ.1.2021.329
Weber, M. (1978). Economy and society: An Outline of Interpretive Sociology: in 2 vols, ed. by G.Roth, C. Wittich. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 1469 p.
Weber, M. (1994). Class, status, party. Social stratification: class, race, and gender in sociological perspective, ed by D.B. Grusky, Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 750 p.
Yakovenko, V.I. (1894). Ogyust Kont, ego zhizn’ i filosofskaya deyatel’nost’: biograficheskiy ocherk [Auguste Comte, his life and philosophical activity: a biographical sketch]. Saint Petersburg: Tovarischestvo «Obschestvennaya pol’za» Publ., 110 p.
Received: 27.04.2021. Revised: 07.06.2021. Accepted: 09.06.2021
For citation:
Kostina N.B., Chizhov A.A. [The role of classic and modern concepts for the analysis of the digital divide factors]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Filosofia. Psihologia. Sociologia [Perm University Herald. Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology], 2021, issue 2, pp. 260–269 (in Russian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.17072/2078-7898/2021-2-260-269