Information Poverty and Political Inequality: Citizenship in the Age of Privatized Communications

Abstract

w b e m~ ' inequality massively daJ2vwm&espeopk's access to goods and seruices, and tbose goods and seruices are tbemsehs a necessary resource for ci&ensEp, tben political rigbts are tbe victim of tbe uicissitdes of tbe markeplace and its inegalttariun structure."The new market-oriented communications and information system that is currently gaining ground within liberal democracies is being sold to the general public on the promise that it will enlarge people's choices and increase their control over their lives, that it will be both liberating and empowering. This emerging order is the product of two major processes: technological innovation and convergence, and "privatization." The first is creating a range of new kinds of communications and information services and restructuring established media industries; the second is providing the essential social and ideological context in which these changes are being developed and promoted."Privatization," with which we are primarily concerned in this article, operates on two main levels. Economically it involves moving the production and provision of communications and information services from the public sector to the market, both by transferring ownership of key facilities to private investors and by making success in the marketplace the major criterion for judging the performance of all communications and information organizations (including those that remain in the public sector). This reconstitution of production is accompanied by a parallel restructuring of consumption. First, nonwork activity becomes ever more securely rooted in the home. Second, the new market-oriented system of provision addresses people predominantly through their identity as consumers, both of the communications and information products they buy and of the products promoted in the expanded advertising system that finances many of the new services. In the process, the system marginalizes or displaces other identities, in particular the identity of citizen. Although a number of commentators have attacked the "privatization" of communications and information services and challenged the claim that the Graham Murdock

Digital divides revisited: what is new about divides and their research?

“…More specifically, existing research (Couldry, 2003(Couldry, , 2007Murdock and Golding, 1989;Schudson, 2003;Stevenson, 1999: 33;Wilhelm, 2000) looks at digital divides from an empowerment perspective and argues that digital inclusion is a requirement for citizen empowerment and democracy. These links between digital divides, democracy and people's empowerment clearly indicate the role that politics must play in closing digital divides.…”

Undressing with the Lights On: Surveillance and The Naked Society in a Digital Era

“…This echoes the work of Hannah Arendt, who in the Origins of Totalitarism (1973) turned her attention to the relationship between human rights and the state, suggesting that privacy was a fundamental right for citizens. Charlotte Epstein (2016) has written extensively on the way in which privacy is wrapped up with our ability to resist anti-democratic movements, and Murdock and Golding (1989) take this even further, stating that privacy allows us to be true citizens, beyond the political process, but rather full members of society. Privacy rights are 'interwoven with people's ability to self-actualize as citizen; to fully inform themselves through unrestricted access to informational resources, and to have meaningful and robust conversations' (Dwyer, 2016: 161).…”

Media, capabilities, and justification

“…Media researchers point to various structural factors that may be relevant here, including a reliance on elite perspectives (Corner 2014: 24-7), limited funding directed towards quality independent journalism (Baker 2002, Habermas 2009: 131-7, Fenton 2011, McChesney 2013, the concentration of media ownership (Noam & International Media Concentration Collaboration 2015), the tendency towards media fragmentation and personalization (Mancini 2013, Couldry & Turow 2014, and ongoing inequalities in media access and use (Murdock & Golding 1989, Robinson et al 2015.…”