Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Digital inequalities 2.0: Legacy inequalities in the information age

  • Laura Robinson
  • , Jeremy Schulz
  • , Grant Blank
  • , Massimo Ragnedda
  • , Hiroshi Ono
  • , Bernie Hogan
  • , Gustavo Mesch
  • , Shelia R. Cotton
  • , Susan B. Kretchmer
  • , Timothy M. Hale
  • , Tomasz Drabowicz
  • , Pu Yan
  • , Barry Wellman
  • , Molly Gloria Harper
  • , Anabel Quan-Haase
  • , Hopeton S. Dunn
  • , Antonio A. Casilli
  • , Paola Tubaro
  • , Rod Carveth
  • , Wenhong Chen
  • Julie B. Wiest, Matías Dodel, Michael J. Stern, Christopher Ball, Kuo Ting Huang, Aneka Khilnani
  • Department of Sociology
  • Santa Clara University
  • Cambridge Institute
  • UC Berkeley Institute
  • University of California, San Diego
  • Oxford University and Nuffield College
  • Northumbria University
  • Human Resources Management
  • Texas A&M University
  • Department of Sociology
  • University of Haifa
  • Department of Media + Information
  • Michigan State University
  • Clemson University
  • Department of Kinesiology and Community Health
  • University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
  • Department of Sociology of Social Structure and Social Change
  • University of Lodz
  • University of Toronto
  • Department of Sociology
  • University of Western Ontario
  • Department of Media Studies
  • University of Botswana
  • School of Communication
  • University of Johannesburg
  • Caribbean School of Media and Communication
  • The University of the West Indies
  • Université Paris-Saclay
  • School of Global Journalism & Communication
  • Morgan State University
  • The University of Texas at Austin
  • West Chester University
  • Northeastern University
  • Universidad Católica del Uruguay
  • Department of Journalism
  • Department of Journalism
  • Ball State University
  • George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

120 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

2020 marks the 25th anniversary of the “digital divide.” Although a quarter century has passed, legacy digital inequalities continue, and emergent digital inequalities are proliferating. Many of the initial schisms identified in 1995 are still relevant today. Twenty-five years later, foundational access inequalities continue to separate the digital haves and the digital have-nots within and across countries. In addition, even ubiquitous-access populations are riven with skill inequalities and differentiated usage. Indeed, legacy digital inequalities persist vis-à-vis economic class, gender, sexuality, race and ethnicity, aging, disability, healthcare, education, rural residency, networks, and global geographies. At the same time, emergent forms of inequality now appear alongside legacy inequalities such that notions of digital inequalities must be continually expanded to become more nuanced. We capture the increasingly complex and interrelated nature of digital inequalities by introducing the concept of the “digital inequality stack.” The concept of the digital inequality stack encompasses access to connectivity networks, devices, and software, as well as collective access to network infrastructure. Other layers of the digital inequality stack include differentiated use and consumption, literacies and skills, production and programming, etc. When inequality exists at foundational layers of the digital inequality stack, this often translates into inequalities at higher levels. As we show across these many thematic foci, layers in the digital inequality stack may move in tandem with one another such that all layers of the digital inequality stack reinforce disadvantage.

Original languageEnglish
JournalFirst Monday
Volume25
Issue number7
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 6 Jul 2020

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 10 - Reduced Inequalities
    SDG 10 Reduced Inequalities

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Digital inequalities 2.0: Legacy inequalities in the information age'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this