The Digital Divide in Global Communication: Inequality, Governance, and the Contest for Narrative Power
Main Article Content
Keywords
digital divide, global communication, platform governance, digital colonialism, media power, algorithmic inequality
Abstract
The spread of information and communication technologies has made connectivity central to global communication, yet the benefits of this transformation are distributed unequally. This article examines the digital divide as a structural feature of contemporary global media rather than a mere gap in hardware access. Drawing on scholarship that treats the divide as a complex and dynamic phenomenon, it argues that the divide operates on at least three intersecting levels: access, usage and skill, and algorithmic and infrastructural power. It then traces how the divide is deepened by the politics of platform governance and by asymmetric control over digital content, and considers how these asymmetries become acute in armed conflict, where the ability to generate, moderate, and frame information is itself a weapon. The article concludes that bridging the divide requires not only connectivity and digital literacy but a redistribution of the power to produce and govern the global media environment.
References
- [1]Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Blackwell.
- [2]van Dijk, J. A. G. M., & Hacker, K. (2003). The digital divide as a complex and dynamic phenomenon. The Information Society, 19(4), 315–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972240309487
- [3]van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2006). Digital divide research, achievements and shortcomings. Poetics, 34(4–5), 221–235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.poetic.2006.05.004
- [4]Kwet, M. (2019). Digital colonialism: US empire and the new imperialism in the Global South. Race & Class, 60(4), 3–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306396818823172
- [5]Norris, P. (2001). Digital divide: Civic engagement, information poverty, and the internet worldwide. Cambridge University Press.
- [6]Selwyn, N. (2004). Reconsidering political and popular understandings of the digital divide. New Media & Society, 6(3), 341–362. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444804042519
- [7]Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-level digital divide: Differences in people's online skills. First Monday, 7(4). https://doi.org/10.5210/fm.v7i4.942
- [8]Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants: Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
- [9]boyd, d., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data: Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information, Communication & Society, 15(5), 662–679. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878
- [10]Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. St. Martin's Press.
- [11]O'Neil, C. (2016). Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. Crown.
- [12]van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2020). The digital divide. Polity Press.
- [13]Couldry, N. (2008). Mediatization or mediation? Alternative understandings of the emergent space of digital storytelling. New Media & Society, 10(3), 373–391. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444808089414
- [14]Zeng, J., & Valdovinos Kaye, D. B. (2022). From content moderation to visibility moderation: A case study of platform governance on TikTok. Policy & Internet, 14(1), 79–95. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.287
- [15]Mutsvairo, B., & Ragnedda, M. (2019). Mapping the digital divide in Africa: A mediated analysis. Amsterdam University Press. https://doi.org/10.5117/9789462986855
- [16]Simons, G. (2019). Digital communication disrupting hegemonic power in global geopolitics. Russia in Global Affairs, 17(2), 108–130. https://doi.org/10.31278/1810-6374-2019-17-2-108-130
- [17]Boichak, O., & Hoskins, A. (2022). My war: Participation in warfare. Digital War, 3, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1057/s42984-022-00060-7
Article Sidebar
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.