15 Globalization, Technology, Social Movements, and Change

Crowd of protesters. Three men stand in the foreground with arms linked.
Figure 15.1 DC protests after police-involved shootings (Photo courtesy of Joseph Gruber/flickr)

How many good friends do you have? How many people do you meet up with for coffee or a movie? How many would you call with news about an illness or invite to your wedding? Now, how many “friends” do you have on Facebook? How often do you post a “selfie” online? How often do you check e-mail? How often do you meet friends for a meal and spend your time texting other people instead of talking to each other? Technology has changed how we interact with each other. It has turned “friend” into a verb and has made it possible to share mundane news (“My dog just threw up under the bed! Ugh!”) with hundreds or even thousands of people who might know you only slightly, if at all. You might be glued to your cell phone, even when you should be focused on driving your car, or you might text in class instead of listening to the professor’s lecture. When we have the ability to stay constantly connected to a data stream, it is easy to lose focus on the here and now.

At the same time that technology is expanding the boundaries of our social circles, various media are also changing how we perceive and interact with each other. We don’t only use Facebook to keep in touch with friends; we also use it to “like” certain television shows, products, or celebrities. Even television is no longer a one-way medium; it is an interactive one. We are encouraged to tweet, text, or call in to vote for contestants in everything from singing competitions to matchmaking endeavors—bridging the gap between our entertainment and our own lives.

How does technology change our lives for the better? Or does it? When you tweet a social cause, share an ice bucket challenge video on YouTube, or cut and paste a status update about cancer awareness on Facebook, are you promoting social change? Does the immediate and constant flow of information mean we are more aware and engaged than any society before us? Or are Keeping Up With the Kardashians and the Real Housewives franchise today’s version of ancient Rome’s “bread and circuses”––distractions and entertainment to keep the working classes complacent about the inequities of their society?

These are some of the questions that interest sociologists. How might we examine these issues from a sociological perspective? A functionalist would probably focus on what social purposes technology and media serve. For example, the web is a form of both technology and media, and it links individuals and nations in a communication network that facilitates both small family discussions and global trade networks. A functionalist would also be interested in the manifest functions of media and technology as well as their role in social dysfunction. Someone applying the conflict perspective would probably focus on the systematic inequality created by differential access to media and technology. For example, how can middle-class U.S. citizens be sure the news they hear is an objective account of reality, unsullied by moneyed political interests? Someone applying the interactionist perspective to technology and the media might seek to understand the difference between the real lives we lead and the reality depicted on “reality” television shows, such as The Bachelor. Throughout this chapter, we will use our sociological imagination to explore how media and technology impact society.

15.1 Technology Today

Learning Objectives

  • Define technology and describe its evolution
  • Understand technological inequality and issues related to unequal access to technology
  • Describe the role of planned obsolescence in technological development
 
(a) Photo shows an arrowhead. (b) Photo shows a man operating a plow drawn by two horses. (c) Photo shows an abacus. (d) Photo shows one of the world’s oldest computers, taking up a whole room. (e) Photo shows a laptop computer. (f) Photo shows a smartphone.
Figure 15.2 Technology is the application of science to address the problems of daily life, from hunting tools and agricultural advances, to manual and electronic ways of computing, to today’s tablets and smartphones. (Photo (a) courtesy of Wikimedia Commons; Photo (b) courtesy of Martin Pettitt/flickr; Photo (c) courtesy of Whitefield d./flickr; Photo (d) courtesy of Andrew Parnell/flickr; Photo (e) courtesy of Jemimus/flickr; Photo (f) courtesy of Kārlis Dambrāns/flickr)

It is easy to look at the latest sleek Apple product and think technology is a recent addition to our world. But from the steam engine to the most cutting-edge robotic surgery tools, technology has described the application of science to address the problems of daily life. We might look back at the enormous and clunky computers of the 1970s that had about as much storage as an iPod Shuffle and roll our eyes in disbelief. But chances are thirty years from now our skinny laptops and iPods will look just as archaic.

What Is Technology?

While most people probably picture computers and cell phones when the subject of technology comes up, technology is not merely a product of the modern era. For example, fire and stone tools were important forms that technology developed during the Stone Age. Just as the availability of digital technology shapes how we live today, the creation of stone tools changed how premodern humans lived and how well they ate. From the first calculator, invented in 2400 B.C.E. Babylon in the form of an abacus, to the predecessor of the modern computer, created in 1882 by Charles Babbage, all of our technological innovations are advancements on previous iterations. And indeed, all aspects of our lives today are influenced by technology. In agriculture, the introduction of machines that can till, thresh, plant, and harvest greatly reduced the need for manual labor, which in turn meant there were fewer rural jobs. This led to the urbanization of society as well as lowered birth rates because there was less need for large families to work the farms. In the criminal justice system, the ability to ascertain innocence through DNA testing has saved the lives of people on death row. The examples are endless: technology plays a role in absolutely every aspect of our lives.

Technological Inequality

 
A brick wall is shown with the word “school” on it and barbed wire on top.
Figure 15.3 Some schools sport cutting-edge computer labs, while others sport barbed wire. Is your academic technology at the cusp of innovation, relatively disadvantaged, or somewhere in between? (Photo courtesy of Carlos Martinez/flickr)

As with any improvement to human society, not everyone has equal access. Technology, in particular, often creates changes that lead to ever greater inequalities. In short, the gap gets wider faster. This technological stratification has led to a new focus on ensuring better access for all.

There are two forms of technological stratification. The first is differential class-based access to technology in the form of the digital divide. This digital divide has led to the second form, a knowledge gap, which is, as it sounds, an ongoing and increasing gap in information for those who have less access to technology. Simply put, students in well-funded schools receive more exposure to technology than students in poorly-funded schools. Those students with more exposure gain more proficiency, which makes them far more marketable in an increasingly technology-based job market and leaves our society divided into those with technological knowledge and those without. Even as we improve access, we have failed to address an increasingly evident gap in e-readiness—the ability to sort through, interpret, and process knowledge (Sciadas 2003).

Since the beginning of the millennium, social science researchers have tried to bring attention to the digital divide and the uneven access to technology among different races, classes, and geographic areas. The term became part of the common lexicon in 1996 when then Vice President Al Gore used it in a speech. This was the point when personal computer use shifted dramatically, from 300,000 users in 1991 to more than 10 million users by 1996 (Rappaport 2009). In part, the issue of the digital divide had to do with communities that received infrastructure upgrades that enabled high-speed internet access, upgrades that largely went to affluent urban and suburban areas, leaving out large swaths of the country.

At the end of the twentieth century, technology access was also a big part of the school experience for those whose communities could afford it. Early in the millennium, poorer communities had little or no technology access, while well-off families had personal computers at home and wired classrooms in their schools. In the 2000s, however, the prices for low-end computers dropped considerably, and it appeared the digital divide was naturally ending. Research demonstrates that technology use and internet access still vary a great deal by race, class, and age in the United States, though most studies agree that there is minimal difference in internet use by adult men and adult women.

Data from the Pew Research Center (2011) suggests the emergence of yet another divide. As technological devices get smaller and more mobile, larger percentages of minority groups (such as Latinos and African Americans) are using their phones to connect to the internet. In fact, about 50 percent of people in these minority groups connect to the web via such devices, whereas only one-third of whites do (Washington 2011). And while it might seem that the internet is the internet, regardless of how you get there, there’s a notable difference. Tasks like updating a résumé or filling out a job application are much harder on a cell phone than on a wired computer in the home. As a result, the digital divide might mean no access to computers or the internet but could mean access to the kind of online technology that allows for empowerment, not just entertainment (Washington 2011).

Mossberger, Tolbert, and Gilbert (2006) demonstrated that the majority of the digital divide for African Americans could be explained by demographic and community-level characteristics, such as socioeconomic status and geographic location. For the Latino population, ethnicity alone, regardless of economics or geography, seemed to limit technology use. Liff and Shepherd (2004) found that women, who are accessing technology shaped primarily by male users, feel less confident in their internet skills and have less internet access at both work and home. Finally, Guillén and Suárez (2005) found that the global digital divide resulted from both the economic and sociopolitical characteristics of countries.

The COVID-19 pandemic exposed the digital divide. Many organizations dedicated money to support technology and internet connectivity. For example, In February 2022, the Federal Communications Commission announced that it would commit over $86 million to the 10th wave of Emergency Connectivity Fund program support. It launched in June 2021 and has committed over $4.62 billion to support all 50 states, Guam, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the District of Columbia. The 2022 funding supported over 240,000 students and provided funding for over 350 schools, 29 libraries, and 8 consortia, which were approved to receive over 239,000 connected devices and over 96,000 broadband connections (Federal Communications Commission, 2022).

Use of Technology and Social Media in Society by Individuals

Do you own an e-reader or tablet? What about your parents or your friends? How often do you check social media or your cell phone? Does all this technology have a positive or negative impact on your life? When it comes to cell phones, 67 percent of users check their phones for messages or calls even when the phone isn’t ringing. In addition, “44% of cell owners have slept with their phone next to their bed because they wanted to make sure they didn’t miss any calls, text messages, or other updates during the night and 29% of cell owners describe their cell phone as ‘something they can’t imagine living without’” (Smith 2012). T. Deng et al.’s (2019) data analysis showed that participants’ average daily smartphone use time was more than 2.5 hours, and participants mainly used social networking apps (e.g., Facebook) across the 7 days of a week, followed by media apps (e.g., YouTube), web browser apps (e.g., Chrome), and communication apps (e.g., Gmail). The log data suggest that an average person kept more than 40 apps on their smartphone but they only used 26 of them over the study period.

While people report that cell phones make it easier to stay in touch, simplify planning and scheduling their daily activities, and increase their productivity, those are not the only impacts of increased cell phone ownership in the United States. Smith also reports that “roughly one in five cell owners say that their phone has made it at least somewhat harder to forget about work at home or on the weekends; to give people their undivided attention; or to focus on a single task without being distracted” (Smith 2012).

According to a new survey from the Pew Research Center, around seven in ten Americans use social media to connect with one another, engage with news content, share information, and entertain themselves (2021). Accordingly, YouTube and Facebook are the most widely used online platforms, and their user base is most broadly representative of the population as a whole. Smaller shares of Americans use sites such as Twitter, Pinterest, Instagram, and LinkedIn.

With so many people using social media both in the United States and abroad, it is no surprise that social media is a powerful force for social change. You will read more about the fight for democracy in the Middle East embodied in the Arab Spring, but spreading democracy is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to using social media to incite change. For example, McKenna Pope, a thirteen-year-old girl, used the internet to successfully petition Hasbro to fight gender stereotypes by creating a gender-neutral Easy-Bake Oven instead of using only the traditional pink color (Kumar 2014). Meanwhile, in Latvia, two twenty-three-year-olds used a U.S. State Department grant to create an e-petition platform so citizens could submit ideas directly to the Latvian government. If at least 20 percent of the Latvian population (roughly 407,200 people) supports a petition, the government will look at it (Kumar 2014).

Online Privacy and Security

As we increase our footprints on the web by going online more often to connect socially, share material, conduct business, and store information, we also increase our vulnerability to those with criminal intent. The Pew Research Center recently published a report that indicated the number of internet users who express concern over the extent of personal information about them available online jumped 17 percent between 2009 and 2013. In that same survey, 12 percent of respondents indicated they had been harassed online, and 11 percent indicated that personal information, such as their Social Security number, had been stolen (Rainie, Kiesler, Kang, and Madden 2013).

Online privacy and security are key organizational concerns as well. Recent large-scale data breaches at retailers such as Target, financial powerhouses such as JP Morgan, the government health insurance site Healthcare.gov, and cell phone providers such as Verizon, exposed millions of people to the threat of identity theft when hackers got access to personal information by compromising website security.

For example, in late August 2014, hackers breached the iCloud data storage site and promptly leaked wave after wave of nude photos from the private accounts of actors such as Jennifer Lawrence and Kirsten Dunst (Lewis 2014). While large-scale data breaches that affect corporations and celebrities are more likely to make the news, individuals may put their personal information at risk simply by clicking a suspect link in an official-sounding e-mail.

How can individuals protect their data? Numerous fact sheets available through the government, nonprofits, and the private sector outline common safety measures, including the following: become familiar with privacy rights; read privacy policies when making a purchase (rather than simply clicking “accept”); give out only the minimum information requested by any source; ask why information is being collected, how it is going to be used, and who will have access it; and monitor your credit history for red flags that indicate your identity has been compromised.

Net Neutrality

The issue of net neutrality, the principle that all internet data should be treated equally by internet service providers, is part of the national debate about internet access and the digital divide. On one side of this debate is the belief that those who provide internet service, like those who provide electricity and water, should be treated as common carriers, legally prohibited from discriminating based on the customer or nature of the goods. Supporters of net neutrality suggest that without such legal protections, the internet could be divided into “fast” and “slow” lanes. A conflict perspective theorist might suggest that this discrimination would allow bigger corporations, such as Amazon, to pay internet providers a premium for faster service, which could lead to gaining an advantage that would drive small, local competitors out of business.

The other side of the debate holds the belief that designating internet service providers as common carriers would constitute an unreasonable regulatory burden and limit the ability of telecommunication companies to operate profitably. A functional perspective theorist might point out that, without profits, companies would not invest in making improvements to their internet service or expanding those services to underserved areas. The final decision rests with the Federal Communications Commission and the federal government, which must decide how to fairly regulate broadband providers without dividing the internet into haves and have-nots.

15.2 Media and Technology in Society

Learning Objectives

  • Describe the evolution and current role of different media, like newspapers, television, and new media
  • Understand the function of product advertising in media
  • Demonstrate awareness of the social homogenization and social fragmentation that occur via modern society’s use of technology and media
 
A photo of a small robot getting patted on the back by two men.
Figure 15.4 In the coming future, there is no doubt that robots are going to play a large role in all aspects of our lives. (Photo courtesy of shay sowden/flickr)

Technology and the media are interwoven, and neither can be separated from contemporary society in most core and semi-peripheral nations. Media is a term that refers to all print, digital, and electronic means of communication. From the time the printing press was created (and even before), technology has influenced how and where information is shared. Today, it is impossible to discuss media and the ways societies communicate without addressing the fast-moving pace of technological change. Twenty years ago, if you wanted to share news of your baby’s birth or a job promotion, you phoned or wrote letters. You might tell a handful of people, but you probably wouldn’t call up several hundred, including your old high school chemistry teacher, to let them know. Now, you might join an online community of parents-to-be even before you announce your pregnancy via a staged Instagram picture. The circle of communication is wider than ever, and when we talk about how societies engage with technology, we must take media into account, and vice versa.

Technology creates media. The comic book you bought your daughter is a form of media, as is the movie you streamed for family night, the website you used to order takeout, the billboard you passed on the way to pick up your food, and the newspaper you read while you were waiting for it. Without technology, media would not exist, but remember, technology is more than just the media we are exposed to.

Categorizing Technology

There is no one way of dividing technology into categories. Whereas once it might have been simple to classify innovations such as machine-based or drug-based or the like, the interconnected strands of technological development mean that advancement in one area might be replicated in dozens of others. For simplicity’s sake, we will look at how the U.S. Patent Office, which receives patent applications for nearly all major innovations worldwide, addresses patents. This regulatory body will patent three types of innovation. Utility patents are the first type. These are granted for the invention or discovery of any new and useful process, product, or machine or for a significant improvement to existing technologies. The second type of patent is a design patent. Commonly conferred in architecture and industrial design, this means someone has invented a new and original design for a manufactured product. Plant patents, the final type, recognize the discovery of new plant types that can be asexually reproduced. While genetically modified food is the hot-button issue within this category, farmers have long been creating new hybrids and patenting them. A more modern example might be food giant Monsanto, which patents corn with built-in pesticides (U.S. Patent and Trademark Office 2011).

Anderson and Tushman (1990) suggest an evolutionary model of technological change, in which a breakthrough in one form of technology leads to a number of variations. Once those are assessed, a prototype emerges, and then a period of slight adjustments to the technology occurs, which is interrupted by a breakthrough. For example, floppy disks were improved and upgraded, then replaced by Zip disks, which were in turn improved to the limits of the technology and were then replaced by flash drives. This is essentially a generational model for categorizing technology, in which first-generation technology is a relatively unsophisticated jumping-off point that leads to an improved second generation, and so on.

Sociolgy in the Real World

Violence in Media and Video Games: Does It Matter?

 
The cover of the Grand Theft Auto IV video game is shown.
Figure 15.5 One of the most popular video games, Grand Theft Auto, has frequently been at the center of debates about gratuitous violence in the gaming world. (Photo courtesy of Meddy Garnet/flickr)

A glance through popular video games and movie titles geared toward children and teens shows the vast spectrum of violence that is displayed, condoned, and acted out.

As a way to guide parents in their programming choices, the motion picture industry put a rating system in place in the 1960s. But new media—video games in particular—proved to be uncharted territory. In 1994, the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) set a rating system for games that addressed issues of violence, sexuality, drug use, and the like. California took it a step further by making it illegal to sell video games to underage buyers. The case led to a heated debate about personal freedoms and child protection, and in 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against the California law, stating it violated freedom of speech (ProCon 2012).

Children’s play has often involved games of aggression—from cowboys and Indians to cops and robbers and to fake sword fights. Many articles report on the controversy surrounding the suggested link between violent video games and violent behavior. Is the link real? Psychologists Anderson and Bushman (2001) reviewed forty-plus years of research on the subject and, in 2003, determined that there are causal linkages between violent video game use and aggression. They found that children who had just played a violent video game demonstrated an immediate increase in hostile or aggressive thoughts, an increase in aggressive emotions, and physiological arousal that increased the chances of acting out aggressive behavior (Anderson 2003).

Ultimately, repeated exposure to this kind of violence leads to increased expectations that violence is a solution, increased violent behavioral scripts, and increased cognitive accessibility to violent behavior (Anderson 2003). In short, people who play a lot of these games find it easier to imagine and access violent solutions than nonviolent ones, and they are less socialized to see violence as a negative. While these facts do not mean there is no role for video games, they should give players pause. In 2013, the American Psychological Association began an expansive meta-analysis of peer-reviewed research analyzing the effect of media violence. Results are expected in 2014.

Types of Media and Technology

Media and technology have evolved hand in hand, from early print to modern publications, from radio to television to film. New media emerge constantly, such as we see in the online world.

Print Newspaper

Early forms of print media, found in ancient Rome, were hand-copied onto boards and carried around to keep the citizenry informed. With the invention of the printing press, the way that people shared ideas changed, as information could be mass-produced and stored. For the first time, there was a way to spread knowledge and information more efficiently; many credit this development as leading to the Renaissance and ultimately the Age of Enlightenment. This is not to say that newspapers of old were more trustworthy than the Weekly World News and National Enquirer are today. Sensationalism abounded, as did censorship that forbade any subjects that would incite the populace.

The invention of the telegraph, in the mid-1800s, changed print media almost as much as the printing press. Suddenly information could be transmitted in minutes. As the nineteenth century became the twentieth, U.S. publishers such as Hearst redefined the world of print media and wielded an enormous amount of power to socially construct national and world events. Of course, even as the media empires of William Randolph Hearst and Joseph Pulitzer were growing, print media also allowed for the dissemination of countercultural or revolutionary materials. Internationally, Vladimir Lenin’s Irksa (The Spark) newspaper was published in 1900 and played a role in Russia’s growing communist movement (World Association of Newspapers 2004).

With the invention and widespread use of television in the mid-twentieth century, newspaper circulation steadily dropped off, and in the twenty-first century, circulation has dropped further as more people turn to internet news sites and other forms of new media to stay informed. According to the Pew Research Center, 2009 saw an unprecedented drop in newspaper circulation––down 10.6 percent from the year before (Pew 2010).

This shift away from newspapers as a source of information has profound effects on societies. When the news is given to a large diverse conglomerate of people, it must maintain some level of broad-based reporting and balance in order to appeal to a broad audience and keep them subscribing. As newspapers decline, news sources become more fractured, so each segment of the audience can choose specifically what it wants to hear and what it wants to avoid.

Increasingly, newspapers are shifting online in an attempt to remain relevant. It is hard to tell what impact new media platforms will have on the way we receive and process information. The Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism (2013) reported that audiences for all the major news magazines declined in 2012, though digital ad revenue increased. The same report suggested that, while newspaper circulation is holding steady at around $10 billion after years of decline, it is digital pay plans that allow newspapers to keep their heads above water, and the digital ad revenue that is increasing for news magazines is not enough to compensate for print revenue loss in newspapers.

A 2014 report suggested that U.S. adults read a median of five books per year in 2013, which is about average. But are they reading traditional print or e-books? About 69 percent of people said they had read at least one printed book in the past year, versus 28 percent who said they’d read an e-book (DeSilver 2014). Is print more effective at conveying information? In a recent study, Mangen, Walgermo, and Bronnick (2013) found that students who read on paper performed slightly better than those who read an e-book on an open-book reading comprehension exam of multiple-choice and short-answer questions. While a meta-analysis of research by Andrews (1992) seemed to confirm that people read more slowly and comprehend less when reading from screens, a meta-analysis of more recent research on this topic does not show anything definite (Noyes and Garland 2008).

Television and Radio

Radio programming obviously preceded television, but both shaped people’s lives in much the same way. In both cases, information (and entertainment) could be enjoyed at home, with a kind of immediacy and community that newspapers could not offer. For instance, many people in the United States might remember when they saw on television or heard on the radio that the Twin Towers in New York City had been attacked in 2001. Even though people were in their own homes, media allowed them to share these moments in real time. This same kind of separate-but-communal approach occurred with entertainment too. School-aged children and office workers gathered to discuss the previous night’s installment of a serial television or radio show.

Right up through the 1970s, U.S. television was dominated by three major networks (ABC, CBS, and NBC) that competed for ratings and advertising dollars. The networks also exerted a lot of control over what people watched. Public television, in contrast, offered an educational nonprofit alternative to the sensationalization of news spurred by the network competition for viewers and advertising dollars. Those sources—PBS (Public Broadcasting Service), the BBC (British Broadcasting Company), and CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Company)—garnered a worldwide reputation for high-quality programming and a global perspective. Al Jazeera, the Arabic independent news station, has joined this group as a similar media force that broadcasts to people worldwide.

The impact of television on U.S. society is hard to overstate. By the late 1990s, 98 percent of U.S. homes had at least one television set, and the average person watched between two and a half and five hours of television daily. All this television has a powerful socializing effect, providing reference groups while reinforcing social norms, values, and beliefs.

Film

The film industry took off in the 1930s when color and sound were first integrated into feature films. Like television, early films were unifying for society: as people gathered in theaters to watch new releases, they would laugh, cry, and be scared together. Movies also act as time capsules or cultural touchstones for society. From Westerns starring the tough-talking Clint Eastwood to the biopic of Facebook founder and Harvard dropout Mark Zuckerberg, movies illustrate society’s dreams, fears, and experiences. While many consider Hollywood the epicenter of moviemaking, India’s Bollywood actually produces more films per year, speaking to the cultural aspirations and norms of Indian society. Increasingly, people are watching films online via Netflix, Hulu, Amazon, and other streaming services. While most streaming video companies keep their user data secret, Nielsen estimated that 38 percent of U.S. citizens accessed Netflix in 2013. In 2013, Google, Inc. reported that YouTube served 1 billion unique viewers every month—an impressive number, considering that it amounts to one-third of the estimated 3 billion accessing the internet every month (Reuters 2013; International Telecommunication Union 2014).

New Media

A photo of a Netflix DVD envelope
Figure 15.6 Netflix, one form of new media, exchanges information in the form of DVDs to users in the comfort of their own homes. (Photo courtesy of Marit & Toomas Hinnosaar/flickr)

New media encompasses all interactive forms of information exchange. These include social networking sites, blogs, podcasts, wikis, and virtual worlds. Clearly, the list grows almost daily. However, there is no guarantee that the information offered is accurate. In fact, the immediacy of new media coupled with the lack of oversight means we must be more careful than ever to ensure our news is coming from accurate sources.

Sociology in the Real World

Planned Obsolescence: Technology That’s Built to Crash

 
Cell phone with cracked screen.
Figure 15.7 People have trouble keeping up with technological innovation. But people may not be to blame, as manufacturers intentionally develop products with short life spans. (Photo courtesy of Mathias F. Svendsen/flickr)

Chances are your mobile phone company, as well as the makers of your laptop and your household appliances, are all counting on their products to fail. Not too quickly, of course, or consumers wouldn’t stand for it—but frequently enough that you might find that it costs far more to fix a device than to replace it with a newer model. Or you find the phone company e-mails you saying that you’re eligible for a free new phone because yours is a whopping two years old. And appliance repair people say that while they might be fixing some machines that are twenty years old, they generally aren’t fixing those that are seven years old; newer models are built to be thrown out. This strategy is called planned obsolescence, and it is the business practice of planning for a product to be obsolete or unusable from the time it is created.

To some extent, planned obsolescence is a natural extension of new and emerging technologies. After all, who is going to cling to an enormous and slow desktop computer from 2000 when a few hundred dollars can buy one that is significantly faster and better? But the practice is not always so benign. The classic example of planned obsolescence is the nylon stocking. Women’s stockings—once an everyday staple of women’s lives––get “runs” or “ladders” after only a few wearings. This requires the stockings to be discarded and new ones purchased. Not surprisingly, the garment industry did not invest heavily in finding a rip-proof fabric; it was in manufacturers’ best interest that their products be regularly replaced.

Those who use Microsoft Windows might feel that like the women who purchased endless pairs of stockings, they are victims of planned obsolescence. Every time Windows releases a new operating system, there are typically not many innovations in it that consumers feel they must have. However, the software programs are upwardly compatible only. This means that while the new versions can read older files, the old version cannot read the newer ones. In short order, those who have not upgraded right away find themselves unable to open files sent by colleagues or friends, and they usually wind up upgrading as well.

Ultimately, whether you are getting rid of your old product because you are being offered a shiny new free one (like the latest smartphone model), or because it costs more to fix than to replace (like the iPod model), or because not doing so leaves you out of the loop (like the Windows model), the result is the same. It might just make you nostalgic for your old Sony Discman and simple DVD player.

Product Advertising

Companies use advertising to sell to us, but the way they reach us is changing. Naomi Klein identified the destructive impact of corporate branding in her 1999 text, No Logo, an antiglobalization treatise that focused on sweatshops, corporate power, and anticonsumerist social movements. In the post-millennial society, synergistic advertising practices ensure you are receiving the same message from a variety of sources and on a variety of platforms. For example, you may see billboards for Miller beer on your way to a stadium, sit down to watch a game preceded by a Miller commercial on the big screen, and watch a halftime ad in which people are shown holding up the trademark bottles. Chances are you can guess which brand of beer is for sale at the concession stand.

Advertising has changed, as technology and media have allowed consumers to bypass traditional advertising venues. From the invention of the remote control, which allows us to skip television advertising without leaving our seats, to recording devices that let us watch programs but skip the ads, conventional television advertising is on the wane. And print media is no different. Advertising revenue in newspapers and on television fell significantly in 2009, which shows that companies need new ways of getting their messages to consumers.

One model companies are considering to address this advertising downturn uses the same philosophy as celebrity endorsements, just on a different scale. Companies are hiring college students to be their on-campus representatives, and they are looking for popular students engaged in high-profile activities like sports, fraternities, and music. The marketing team is betting that if we buy perfume because Beyoncé tells us to, we’ll also choose our cell phone or smoothie brand if a popular student encourages that choice. According to an article in the New York Times, the fall semester of 2011 saw an estimated 10,000 U.S. college students working on campus as brand ambassadors for products from Red Bull energy drinks to Hewlett-Packard computers (Singer 2011). As the companies figure it, college students will trust one source of information above all: other students.

Homogenization and Fragmentation

Despite the variety of media at hand, the mainstream news and entertainment you enjoy are increasingly homogenized. Research by McManus (1995) suggests that different news outlets all tell the same stories, using the same sources, resulting in the same message, presented with only slight variations. So whether you are reading the New York Times or CNN’s website, the coverage of national events like a major court case or political issue will likely be the same.

Simultaneously with this homogenization among the major news outlets, the opposite process is occurring in the newer media streams. With so many choices, people increasingly customize their news experience, minimizing their opportunity to encounter information that does not jive with their worldview (Prior 2005). For instance, those who are staunchly Republican can avoid centrist or liberal-leaning cable news shows and websites that would show Democrats in a favorable light. They know to seek out Fox News over MSNBC, just as Democrats know to do the opposite. Further, people who want to avoid politics completely can choose to visit websites that deal only with entertainment or that will keep them up to date on sports scores. They have an easy way to avoid information they do not wish to hear.

15.3 Global Implications of Media and Technology

Learning Objectives

  • Explain the advantages and concerns of media globalization
  • Understand the globalization of technology
 
A Twitter update page from a U.S. photojournalist in Cairo, Egypt, during the recent uprising is shown.
Figure 15.8 These Twitter updates—a revolution in real-time—show the role social media can play on the political stage. (Photo courtesy of Cambodia4kidsorg/flickr)

Technology, and increasingly media, have always driven globalization. In a landmark book, Thomas Friedman (2005), identified several ways in which technology “flattened” the globe and contributed to our global economy. The first edition of The World Is Flat, written in 2005, posits that core economic concepts were changed by personal computing and high-speed internet. Access to these two technological shifts has allowed core-nation corporations to recruit workers in call centers located in China or India. Using examples like a Midwestern U.S. woman who runs a business from her home via the call centers of Bangalore, India, Friedman warns that this new world order will exist whether core-nation businesses are ready or not and that in order to keep its key economic role in the world, the United States will need to pay attention to how it prepares workers of the twenty-first century for this dynamic.

Of course, not everyone agrees with Friedman’s theory. Many economists pointed out that in reality innovation, economic activity, and population still gather in geographically attractive areas, and they continue to create economic peaks and valleys, which are by no means flattened out to mean equality for all. China’s hugely innovative and powerful cities of Shanghai and Beijing are worlds away from the rural squalor of the country’s poorest denizens.

It is worth noting that Friedman is an economist, not a sociologist. His work focuses on the economic gains and risks this new world order entails. In this section, we will look more closely at how media globalization and technological globalization play out from a sociological perspective. As the names suggest, media globalization is the worldwide integration of media through the cross-cultural exchange of ideas, while technological globalization refers to the cross-cultural development and exchange of technology.

Media Globalization

Lyons (2005) suggests that multinational corporations are the primary vehicle of media globalization, and these corporations control global mass-media content and distribution (Compaine 2005). It is true when looking at who controls which media outlets, that there are fewer independent news sources as larger and larger conglomerates develop. The United States offers about 1,500 newspapers, 2,600 book publishers, and an equal number of television stations, plus 6,000 magazines and a whopping 10,000 radio outlets (Bagdikian 2004).

On the surface, there is endless opportunity to find diverse media outlets. But the numbers are misleading. Media consolidation is a process in which fewer and fewer owners control the majority of media outlets. This creates an oligopoly in which a few firms dominate the media marketplace. In 1983, a mere 50 corporations owned the bulk of mass-media outlets. Today in the United States (which has no government-owned media), just five companies control 90 percent of media outlets (McChesney 1999). Ranked by 2014 company revenue, Comcast is the biggest, followed by the Disney Corporation, Time Warner, CBS, and Viacom (Time.com 2014). What impact does this consolidation have on the type of information to which the U.S. public is exposed? Does media consolidation deprive the public of multiple viewpoints and limit its discourse to the information and opinions shared by a few sources? Why does it matter?

Monopolies matter because less competition typically means consumers are less well-served, since dissenting opinions or diverse viewpoints are less likely to be found. Media consolidation results in the following dysfunctions. First, consolidated media owes more to its stockholders than to the public. Publicly traded Fortune 500 companies must pay more attention to their profitability and to government regulators than to the public’s right to know. The few companies that control most of the media, because they are owned by the power elite, represent the political and social interests of only a small minority. In an oligopoly, there are fewer incentives to innovate, improve services, or decrease prices.

While some social scientists predicted that the increase in media forms would create a global village (McLuhan 1964), current research suggests that the public sphere accessing the global village will tend to be rich, Caucasoid, and English-speaking (Jan 2009). As shown by the spring 2011 uprisings throughout the Arab world, technology really does offer a window into the news of the world. For example, here in the United States, we saw internet updates of Egyptian events in real-time, with people tweeting, posting, and blogging on the ground in Tahrir Square.

Still, there is no question that the exchange of technology from core nations to peripheral and semi-peripheral ones leads to a number of complex issues. For instance, someone using a conflict theorist approach might focus on how much political ideology shifts and cultural colonialism occurs with technological growth. In theory, at least, technological innovations are ideology-free; fiber optic cable is the same in a Muslim country as in a secular, communist, or capitalist one. But those who bring technology to less-developed nations—whether they are nongovernment organizations, businesses, or governments—usually have an agenda. A functionalist, in contrast, might focus on the ways technology creates new means to share information about successful crop-growing programs, or on the economic benefits of opening a new market for cell phone use. Either way, cultural and societal assumptions, and norms are being delivered along with those high-speed wires.

Cultural and ideological bias are not the only risks of media globalization. In addition to the risk of cultural imperialism and the loss of local culture, other problems come with the benefits of a more interconnected globe. One risk is the potential for censoring by national governments that let in only the information and media they feel serve their message, as is occurring in China. In addition, core nations such as the United States risk the use of international media by criminals to circumvent local laws against socially deviant and dangerous behaviors such as gambling, child pornography, and the sex trade. Offshore or international websites allow U.S. citizens (and others) to seek out whatever illegal or illicit information they want, from twenty-four-hour online gambling sites that do not require proof of age, to sites that sell child pornography. These examples illustrate the societal risks of unfettered information flow.

Big Picture

China and the Internet: An Uncomfortable Friendship

 
Many people sitting in chairs are shown staring at computer screens in a restaurant/café setting. Chinese posters can also be seen.
Figure 15.9 What information is accessible to these patrons of an internet café in China? What is censored from their view? (Photo Courtesy of Kai Hendry/flickr)

In the United States, the internet is used to access illegal gambling and pornography sites, as well as to research stocks, crowd-source what car to buy, or keep in touch with childhood friends. Can we allow one or more of those activities, while restricting the rest? And who decides what needs restricting? In a country with democratic principles and an underlying belief in free-market capitalism, the answer is decided in the court system. But globally, the questions––and the government’s responses––are very different.

China is in many ways the global poster child for the uncomfortable relationship between internet freedom and government control. China, which is a country with a tight rein on the dissemination of information, has long worked to suppress what it calls “harmful information,” including dissent concerning government politics, dialogue about China’s role in Tibet, or criticism of the government’s handling of events.

With sites like Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube blocked in China, the nation’s internet users––some 500 million strong in 2011––turn to local media companies for their needs. Renren.com is China’s answer to Facebook. Perhaps more importantly from a social-change perspective, Sina Weibo is China’s version of Twitter. Microblogging, or Weibo, acts like Twitter in that users can post short messages that can be read by their subscribers. And because these services move so quickly and with such wide scope, it is difficult for government overseers to keep up. This tool was used to criticize the government’s response to a deadly rail crash and to protest a chemical plant. It was also credited with the government’s decision to report more accurately on air pollution in Beijing, which occurred after a high-profile campaign by a well-known property developer (Pierson 2012).

There is no question of China’s authoritarian government ruling over this new form of internet communication. The nation blocks the use of certain terms, such as human rights, and passes new laws that require people to register with their real names and make it more dangerous to criticize government actions. Indeed, fifty-six-year-old microblogger Wang Lihong was recently sentenced to nine months in prison for “stirring up trouble,” as her government described her work of helping people with government grievances (Bristow 2011). But the government cannot shut down this flow of information completely. Foreign companies, seeking to engage with the increasingly important Chinese consumer market, have their own accounts: the NBA has more than 5 million followers, and Tom Cruise’s Weibo account boasts almost 3 million followers (Zhang 2011). The government, too, uses Weibo to get its own message across. As the millennium progresses, China’s approach to social media and the freedoms it offers will be watched anxiously––on Sina Weibo and beyond––by the rest of the world.

Technological Globalization

Technological globalization is speeded in large part by technological diffusion, the spread of technology across borders. In the last two decades, there has been rapid improvement in the spread of technology to peripheral and semi-peripheral nations, and a 2008 World Bank report discusses both the benefits and ongoing challenges of this diffusion. In general, the report found that technological progress and economic growth rates were linked and that the rise in technological progress has helped improve the situations of many living in absolute poverty (World Bank 2008). The report recognizes that rural and low-tech products such as corn can benefit from new technological innovations, and that, conversely, technologies like mobile banking can aid those whose rural existence consists of low-tech market vending. In addition, technological advances in areas like mobile phones can lead to competition, lowered prices, and concurrent improvements in related areas such as mobile banking and information sharing.

However, the same patterns of social inequality that create a digital divide in the United States also create digital divides within peripheral and semi-peripheral nations. While the growth of technology use among countries has increased dramatically over the past several decades, the spread of technology within countries is significantly slower among peripheral and semi-peripheral nations. In these countries, far fewer people have the training and skills to take advantage of new technology, let alone access it. Technological access tends to be clustered around urban areas and leaves out vast swaths of peripheral-nation citizens. While the diffusion of information technologies has the potential to resolve many global social problems, it is often the population most in need that is most affected by the digital divide. For example, technology to purify water could save many lives, but the villages in peripheral nations most in need of water purification don’t have access to the technology, the funds to purchase it, or the technological comfort level to introduce it as a solution.

Sociology in the Real World

The Mighty Cell Phone: How Mobile Phones Are Impacting Sub-Saharan Africa

Many of Africa’s poorest countries suffer from a marked lack of infrastructure including poor roads, limited electricity, and minimal access to education and telephones. But while landline use has not changed appreciably during the past ten years, there’s been a fivefold increase in mobile phone access; more than a third of people in Sub-Saharan Africa have the ability to access a mobile phone (Katine 2010). Even more, can use a “village phone”—through a shared-phone program created by the Grameen Foundation. With access to mobile phone technology, a host of benefits become available that have the potential to change the dynamics in these poorest nations. Sometimes that change is as simple as being able to make a phone call to neighboring market towns. By finding out which markets have vendors interested in their goods, fishers and farmers can ensure they travel to the market that will serve them best and avoid a wasted trip. Others can use mobile phones and some of the emerging money-sending systems to securely send money to a family member or business partner elsewhere (Katine 2010).

These shared-phone programs are often funded by businesses like Germany’s Vodafone or Britain’s Masbabi, which hope to gain market share in the region. Phone giant Nokia points out that there are 4 billion mobile phone users worldwide—that’s more than twice as many people as have bank accounts—meaning there is a ripe opportunity to connect banking companies with people who need their services (ITU Telecom 2009). Not all access is corporate-based, however. Other programs are funded by business organizations that seek to help peripheral nations with tools for innovation and entrepreneurship.

But this wave of innovation and potential business comes with costs. There is, certainly, the risk of cultural imperialism, and the assumption that core nations (and core-nation multinationals) know what is best for those struggling in the world’s poorest communities. Whether well-intentioned or not, the vision of a continent of Africans successfully chatting on their iPhones may not be ideal. Like all aspects of global inequity, access to technology in Africa requires more than just foreign investment. There must be a concerted effort to ensure the benefits of technology get to where they are needed most.

15.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Media and Technology

Learning Objectives

  • Understand and discuss how we analyze media and technology through various sociological perspectives

 

It is difficult to conceive of any one theory or theoretical perspective that can explain the variety of ways in which people interact with technology and the media. Technology runs the gamut from the match you strike to light a candle all the way up to sophisticated nuclear power plants that might power the factory where that candle was made. Media could refer to the television you watch, the ads wrapping the bus you take to work or school, or the magazines you flip through in a dentist’s waiting room, not to mention all the forms of new media, including Instagram, Facebook, blogs, YouTube, and the like. Are media and technology critical to the forward march of humanity? Are they pernicious capitalist tools that lead to the exploitation of workers worldwide? Are they the magic bullet the world has been waiting for to level the playing field and raise the world’s poor out of extreme poverty? Choose any opinion and you will find studies and scholars who agree with you––and those who disagree.

Functionalism

Because functionalism focuses on how media and technology contribute to the smooth functioning of society, a good place to begin understanding this perspective is to write a list of functions you perceive media and technology to perform. Your list might include the ability to find information on the internet, television’s entertainment value, or how advertising and product placement contribute to social norms.

Commercial Function

 
A boy and girl are shown from behind watching a football game on television. A coffee table sits between them and the television, and a bookshelf is beside the TV.
Figure 15.10 TV commercials can carry significant cultural currency. For some, the ads during the Super Bowl are more water cooler-worthy than the game itself. (Photo courtesy of Dennis Yang/flickr)

As you might guess, with nearly every U.S. household possessing a television, and the 250 billion hours of television watched annually by people in the United States, companies that wish to connect with consumers find television an irresistible platform to promote their goods and services (Nielsen 2012). Television advertising is a highly functional way to meet a market demographic where it lives. Sponsors can use the sophisticated data gathered by network and cable television companies regarding their viewers and target their advertising accordingly. Whether you are watching cartoons on Nick Jr. or a cooking show on Telemundo, chances are advertisers have a plan to reach you.

And it certainly doesn’t stop with television. Commercial advertising precedes movies in theaters and shows up on and inside public transportation, as well as on the sides of buildings and roadways. Major corporations such as Coca-Cola bring their advertising into public schools, by sponsoring sports fields or tournaments, as well as filling the halls and cafeterias of those schools with vending machines hawking their goods. With rising concerns about childhood obesity and attendant diseases, the era of soda machines in schools may be numbered. In fact, as part of the United States Department of Agriculture’s Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act and Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move! The initiative, a ban on junk food in school began in July 2014.

Entertainment Function

An obvious manifest function of media is its entertainment value. Most people, when asked why they watch television or go to the movies, would answer that they enjoy it. And the numbers certainly illustrate that. While 2012 Nielsen research shows a slight reduction in the number of U.S. homes with televisions, the reach of television is still vast. And the amount of time spent watching is equally large. Clearly, enjoyment is paramount. On the technology side, as well, there is a clear entertainment factor to the use of new innovations. From online gaming to chatting with friends on Facebook, technology offers new and more exciting ways for people to entertain themselves.

Social Norm Functions

Even while the media is selling us goods and entertaining us, it also serves to socialize us, helping us pass along norms, values, and beliefs to the next generation. In fact, we are socialized and resocialized by media throughout our whole lives. All forms of media teach us what is good and desirable, how we should speak, how we should behave, and how we should react to events. Media also provide us with cultural touchstones during events of national significance. How many of your older relatives can recall watching the explosion of the space shuttle Challenger on television? How many of those reading this textbook followed the events of September 11 or Hurricane Katrina on television or the internet?

Just as in Anderson and Bushman’s (2011) evidence in the Violence in Media and Video Games: Does It Matter? feature, debate still exists over the extent and impact of media socialization. One recent study (Krahe et al. 2011) demonstrated that violent media content does have a desensitizing effect and is correlated with aggressive thoughts. Another group of scholars (Gentile, Mathieson, and Crick 2011) found that children’s exposure to media violence led to an increase in both physical and relational aggression. Yet, a meta-analysis study covering four decades of research (Savage 2003) could not establish a definitive link between viewing violence and committing criminal violence.

It is clear from watching people emulate the styles of dress and talk that appear in media that media has a socializing influence. What is not clear, despite nearly fifty years of empirical research, is how much socializing influence the media has when compared to other agents of socialization, which include any social institution that passes along norms, values, and beliefs (such as peers, family, religious institutions, and the like).

Life-Changing Functions

Like media, many forms of technology do indeed entertain us, provide a venue for commercialization, and socialize us. For example, some studies suggest the rising obesity rate is correlated with the decrease in physical activity caused by an increase in the use of some forms of technology, a latent function of the prevalence of media in society (Kautiainen et al. 2011). Without a doubt, a manifest function of technology is to change our lives, sometimes for the better and sometimes for the worse. Think of how the digital age has improved the ways we communicate. Have you ever used Skype or another webcast to talk to a friend or family member far away? Or maybe you have organized a fund drive, raising thousands of dollars, all from your desk chair.

Of course, the downside to this ongoing information flow is the near impossibility of disconnecting from technology which leads to an expectation of constant convenient access to information and people. Such a fast-paced dynamic is not always to our benefit. Some sociologists assert that this level of media exposure leads to narcotizing dysfunction, a result in which people are too overwhelmed with media input to really care about the issue, so their involvement becomes defined by awareness instead of by action (Lazerfeld and Merton 1948).

Conflict Perspective

In contrast to theories in the functional perspective, the conflict perspective focuses on the creation and reproduction of inequality—social processes that tend to disrupt society rather than contribute to its smooth operation. When we take a conflict perspective, one major focus is the differential access to media and technology embodied in the digital divide. Conflict theorists also look at who controls the media, and how media promotes the norms of upper-middle-class white people in the United States while minimizing the presence of the working class, especially people of color.

Control of Media and Technology

Powerful individuals and social institutions have a great deal of influence over which forms of technology are released, when and where they are released, and what kind of media is available for our consumption, which is a form of gatekeeping. Shoemaker and Vos (2009) define gatekeeping as the sorting process by which thousands of possible messages are shaped into a mass media-appropriate form and reduced to a manageable amount. In other words, the people in charge of the media decide what the public is exposed to, which, as C. Wright Mills (1956) famously noted, is the heart of media’s power. Take a moment to think of the way “new media” evolve and replace traditional forms of hegemonic media. With hegemonic media, a culturally diverse society can be dominated by one race, gender, or class that manipulates the media to impose its worldview as a societal norm. New media weakens the gatekeeper role in information distribution. Popular sites such as YouTube and Facebook not only allow more people to freely share information but also engage in a form of self-policing. Users are encouraged to report inappropriate behavior that moderators will then address.

In addition, some conflict theorists suggest that the way U.S. media are generated results in an unbalanced political arena. Those with the most money can buy the most media exposure, run smear campaigns against their competitors, and maximize their visual presence. Almost a year before the 2012 U.S. presidential election, the candidates––Barack Obama for the Democrats and numerous Republican contenders––had raised more than $186 million (Carmi et al. 2012). Some would say that the Citizens United vs. Federal Election Committee is a major contributing factor to our unbalanced political arena. In Citizens United, the Supreme Court affirmed the right of outside groups, including Super Political Action Committees (SuperPACs) with undisclosed donor lists, to spend unlimited amounts of money on political ads as long as they don’t coordinate with the candidate’s campaign or specifically advocate for a candidate. What do you think a conflict perspective theorist would suggest about the potential for the non-rich to be heard in politics, especially when SuperPACs ensure that the richest groups have the most say?

Technological Social Control and Digital Surveillance

Social scientists take the idea of the surveillance of society so seriously that there is an entire journal devoted to its study, Surveillance and Society. The panoptic surveillance envisioned by Jeremy Bentham, depicted in the form of an all-powerful, all-seeing government by George Orwell in 1984, and later analyzed by Michel Foucault (1975) is increasingly realized in the form of technology used to monitor our every move. This surveillance was imagined as a form of constant monitoring in which the observation posts are decentralized and the observed is never communicated with directly. Today, digital security cameras capture our movements, observers can track us through our cell phones, and police forces around the world use facial recognition software.

Feminist Perspective

 
A thin female model is shown participating in New York’s fashion week.
Figure 15.11 What types of women are we exposed to in the media? Some would argue that the range of female images is misleadingly narrow. (Photo courtesy of Cliff1066/flickr)

Take a look at popular television shows, advertising campaigns, and online game sites. In most, women are portrayed in a particular set of parameters and tend to have a uniform look that society recognizes as attractive. Most are thin, white, or light-skinned, beautiful, and young. Why does this matter? Feminist perspective theorists believe this idealized image is crucial in creating and reinforcing stereotypes. For example, Fox and Bailenson (2009) found that online female avatars conforming to gender stereotypes enhance negative attitudes toward women, and Brasted (2010) found that media (advertising in particular) promotes gender stereotypes. As early as 1990, Ms. magazine instituted a policy to publish without any commercial advertising.

The gender gap in tech-related fields (science, technology, engineering, and math) is no secret. A 2011 U.S. Department of Commerce Report suggested that gender stereotyping is one reason for this gap which acknowledges the bias toward men as keepers of technological knowledge (US Department of Commerce 2011). But gender stereotypes go far beyond the use of technology. Press coverage in the media reinforces stereotypes that subordinate women; it gives airtime to look over skills, and coverage disparages women who defy accepted norms.

Recent research in new media has offered a mixed picture of its potential to equalize the status of men and women in the arenas of technology and public discourse. A European agency, the Advisory Committee on Equal Opportunities for Men and Women (2010), issued an opinion report suggesting that while there is the potential for new media forms to perpetuate gender stereotypes and the gender gap in technology and media access, at the same time new media could offer alternative forums for feminist groups and the exchange of feminist ideas. Still, the committee warned against the relatively unregulated environment of new media and the potential for antifeminist activities, from pornography to human trafficking, to flourish there.

Increasingly prominent in the discussion of new media and feminism is cyberfeminism, the application to, and promotion of, feminism online. Research on cyberfeminism runs the gamut from the liberating use of blogs by women living in Iraq during the second Gulf War (Peirce 2011) to an investigation of the Suicide Girls website (Magnet 2007).

Symbolic Interactionism

Technology itself may act as a symbol for many. The kind of computer you own, the kind of car you drive, your ability to afford the latest Apple product—these serve as social indicators of wealth and status. Neo-Luddites are people who see technology as symbolizing the coldness and alienation of modern life. But for technophiles, technology symbolizes the potential for a brighter future. For those adopting an ideological middle ground, technology might symbolize status (in the form of a massive flat-screen television) or failure (ownership of a basic old mobile phone with no bells or whistles).

Social Construction of Reality

Meanwhile, media create and spread symbols that become the basis for our shared understanding of society. Theorists working in the interactionist perspective focus on this social construction of reality, an ongoing process in which people subjectively create and understand reality. Media constructs our reality in a number of ways. For some, the people they watch on a screen can become a primary group, meaning the small informal groups of people who are closest to them. For many others, media becomes a reference group: a group that influences an individual and to which an individual compares himself or herself, and by which we judge our successes and failures. We might do very well without the latest smartphone until we see characters using it on our favorite television show or our classmates whipping it out between classes.

While media may indeed be the medium to spread the message of rich white males, Gamson, Croteau, Hoynes, and Sasson (1992) point out that some forms of media discourse allow competing constructions of reality to appear. For example, advertisers find new and creative ways to sell us products we don’t need and probably wouldn’t want without their prompting, but some networking sites such as Freecycle offer a commercial-free way of requesting and trading items that would otherwise be discarded. The web is also full of blogs chronicling lives lived “off the grid,” or without participation in the commercial economy.

Social Networking and Social Construction

While Tumblr and Facebook encourage us to check-in and provide details of our day through online social networks, corporations can just as easily promote their products on these sites. Even supposedly crowd-sourced sites like Yelp (which aggregates local reviews) are not immune to corporate shenanigans. That is, we think we are reading objective observations when in reality we may be buying into one more form of advertising.

Facebook, which started as a free social network for college students, is increasingly a monetized business, selling you goods and services in subtle ways. But chances are you don’t think of Facebook as one big online advertisement. What started out as a symbol of coolness and insider status, unavailable to parents and corporate shills, now promotes consumerism in the form of games and fandom. For example, think of all the money spent to upgrade popular Facebook games like Candy Crush. And notice that whenever you become a “fan,” you likely receive product updates and special deals that promote online and real-world consumerism. It is unlikely that millions of people want to be “friends” with Pampers. But if it means a weekly coupon, they will, in essence, rent out space on their Facebook pages for Pampers to appear. Thus, we develop both new ways to spend money and brand loyalties that will last even after Facebook is considered outdated and obsolete.

Protest sign that reads "Sorry for the inconvenience we are trying to change the world."
Figure 15.12 Black Lives Matter (Photo courtesy of Wikimedia Commons)

Social Movements and Social Change

The killing of George Floyd, in May 2020 was viewed on television by many Americans. The killing of George Floyd was played out through the national media as a controversial and political issue.  George Floyd was killed by a US police officer Derek Michael Chauvin who was later convicted of the murder.  The acquittal of George Zimmerman for the killing of Travon Martin, an African American teenager, and the Killing of George Floyd are events that drove momentum for the Black Lives Matter movement. Black Lives Matter is now a global human rights movement.  Their goal is to end violence and systemic racism toward Black people and other people of color. Occupy Wall Street (OWS) is another social movement that ran the most contrary to theory in recent history. Although it contains many of the classic developmental elements of a social movement we will describe in this chapter, it is set apart by its lack of a single message, its leaderless organization, and its target—financial institutions instead of the government. OWS baffled much of the public, and certainly the mainstream media, leading many to ask, “Who are they, and what do they want?”

On July 13, 2011, the organization Adbusters posted on its blog, “Are you ready for a Tahrir moment? On September 17th, flood into lower Manhattan, set up tents, kitchens, peaceful barricades and occupy Wall Street” (Castells 2012).

The “Tahrir moment” was a reference to the 2010 political uprising that began in Tunisia and spread throughout the Middle East and North Africa, including Egypt’s Tahrir Square in Cairo. Although OWS was a reaction to the continuing financial chaos that resulted from the 2008 market meltdown and not a political movement, the Arab Spring was its catalyst.

Manuel Castells (2012) notes that the years leading up to the Occupy movement had witnessed a dizzying increase in the disparity of wealth in the United States, stemming back to the 1980s. The top 1 percent in the nation had secured 58 percent of the economic growth in the period for themselves, while real hourly wages for the average worker had increased by only 2 percent. The wealth of the top 5 percent had increased by 42 percent. The average pay of a CEO was now 350 times that of the average worker, compared to less than 50 times in 1983 (AFL-CIO 2014). The country’s leading financial institutions, which to many were clearly to blame for the crisis and had been dubbed “too big to fail,” were in trouble after many poorly qualified borrowers defaulted on their mortgage loans when the loans’ interest rates rose. The banks were eventually “bailed” out by the government with $700 billion of taxpayer money. According to many reports, that same year top executives and traders received large bonuses.

On September 17, 2011, an anniversary of the signing of the U.S. Constitution, the occupation began. One thousand outraged protestors descended upon Wall Street, and up to 20,000 people moved into Zuccotti Park, only two blocks away, where they began building a village of tents and organizing a system of communication. The protest soon began spreading throughout the nation, and its members started calling themselves “the 99 percent.” More than a thousand cities and towns had Occupy demonstrations.

In answer to the question “Who are they?” Castells notes “. . . by and large the movement was made up of a large majority of democratic voters, as well as of politically independent-minded people who were in search of new forms of changing the world . . . ” (Castells 2012). What do they want? Castells has dubbed OWS “A non-demand movement: The process is the message.” Using Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, and live-stream video, the protesters conveyed a multifold message with a long list of reforms and social change, including the need to address the rising disparity of wealth, the influence of money on election outcomes, the notion of “corporate personhood,” a corporatized political system (to be replaced by “direct democracy”), political favoring of the rich, and rising student debt. Regardless, some in the media appeared confused about the protestors’ intentions, and articles carried titles like, “The Wall Street Protesters: What the Hell Do They Want?” (Gell 2011) from The New York Observer, and person-in-the-street quotations like, “I think they’re idiots. They have no agenda . . . ” from the Los Angeles Times (Le Tellier 2012).

The late James C. Davies suggested in his 1962 paper, “Toward a Theory of Revolution” (from the American Sociological Review, Vol, 27 Issue 1) that revolution depends upon the mood of the people, and that it is extremely unlikely for those in absolute poverty will be able to overturn a government, simply because the government has infinitely more power. Instead, a revolution is more possible when expected need satisfaction and actual need satisfaction are out of sync. As actual need satisfaction trends downward and away from what a formerly prosperous people have come to expect—tracing a curve that looks somewhat like an upside-down J and is called the Davies-J curve—the gap between expectations and reality widens. Eventually, an intolerable point is reached, and revolution occurs. Thus, change comes not from the very bottom of the social hierarchy, but from somewhere in the middle. Indeed, the Arab Spring was driven by mostly young people whose education had offered promise and expectations that were thwarted by corrupt autocratic governments. OWS too came not from the bottom but from people in the middle, who exploited the power of social media to enhance communication.

15.5 Collective Behavior

Learning Objectives

  • Describe different forms of collective behavior
  • Differentiate between types of crowds
  • Discuss emergent norm, value-added, and assembling perspective analyses of collective behavior

Sociology in the Real World

Flash Mobs

 
People having a pillow fight outdoors.
Figure 15.13 Is this a good time had by all? Some flash mobs may function as political protests, while others are for fun. This flash mob pillow fight’s purpose was to entertain. (Photo courtesy of Mattwi1S0n:/flickr)

In March 2014, a group of musicians got together in a fish market in Odesa for a spontaneous performance of Beethoven’s “Ode to Joy” from his Ninth Symphony. While tensions were building over Ukraine’s efforts to join the European Union, and even as Russian troops had taken control of the Ukrainian airbase in Belbek, the Odesa Philharmonic Orchestra and Opera Chorus tried to lighten the troubled times for shoppers with music and song.

Spontaneous gatherings like this are called flash mobs. They often are captured on video and shared on the internet; frequently they go viral. Humans seek connections and shared experiences. Perhaps experiencing a flash mob event enhances this bond. It certainly interrupts our otherwise mundane routine with a reminder that we are social animals.

Forms of Collective Behavior

Flash mobs are examples of collective behavior, noninstitutionalized activity in which several or many people voluntarily engage. Other examples are a group of commuters traveling home from work and a population of teens adopting a favorite singer’s hairstyle. In short, collective behavior is any group behavior that is not mandated or regulated by an institution. There are three primary forms of collective behavior: the crowd, the mass, and the public.

It takes a fairly large number of people in close proximity to form a crowd (Lofland 1993). Examples include a group of people attending an Ani DiFranco concert, tailgating at a Patriots game, or attending a worship service. Turner and Killian (1993) identified four types of crowds. Casual crowds consist of people who are in the same place at the same time but who aren’t really interacting, such as people standing in line at the post office. Conventional crowds are those who come together for a scheduled event that occurs regularly, like a religious service. Expressive crowds are people who join together to express emotion, often at funerals, weddings, or the like. The final type, acting crowdsfocuses on a specific goal or action, such as a protest movement or riot.

In addition to the different types of crowds, collective groups can also be identified in two other ways. A mass is a relatively large number of people with a common interest, though they may not be in close proximity (Lofland 1993), such as players of the popular Facebook game Farmville. A public, on the other hand, is an unorganized, relatively diffused group of people who share ideas, such as the Libertarian political party. While these two types of crowds are similar, they are not the same. To distinguish between them, remember that members of a mass share interests, whereas members of a public share ideas.

Theoretical Perspectives on Collective Behavior

Early collective behavior theories (LeBon 1895; Blumer 1969) focused on the irrationality of crowds. Eventually, those theorists who viewed crowds as uncontrolled groups of irrational people were supplanted by theorists who viewed the behavior some crowds engaged in as the rational behavior of logical beings.

Emergent-Norm Perspective

 
Photo of damaged antique store that reads "Loot and Get Shot."
Figure 15.14 According to the emergent-norm perspective, Hurricane Katrina victims sought needed supplies for survival, but to outsiders, their behavior would normally be seen as looting. (Photo courtesy of Infrogmation/Wikimedia Commons)

Sociologists Ralph Turner and Lewis Killian (1993) built on earlier sociological ideas and developed what is known as emergent norm theory. They believe that the norms experienced by people in a crowd may be disparate and fluctuating. They emphasize the importance of these norms in shaping crowd behavior, especially those norms that shift quickly in response to changing external factors. Emergent norm theory asserts that, in this circumstance, people perceive and respond to the crowd situation with their particular (individual) set of norms, which may change as the crowd experience evolves. This focus on the individual component of interaction reflects a symbolic interactionist perspective.

For Turner and Killian, the process begins when individuals suddenly find themselves in a new situation, or when an existing situation suddenly becomes strange or unfamiliar. For example, think about human behavior during Hurricane Katrina. New Orleans was decimated and people were trapped without supplies or a way to evacuate. In these extraordinary circumstances, what outsiders saw as “looting” was defined by those involved as seeking needed supplies for survival. Normally, individuals would not wade into a corner gas station and take canned goods without paying, but given that they were suddenly in a greatly changed situation, they established a norm that they felt was reasonable.

Once individuals find themselves in a situation ungoverned by previously established norms, they interact in small groups to develop new guidelines on how to behave. According to the emergent-norm perspective, crowds are not viewed as irrational, impulsive, uncontrolled groups. Instead, norms develop and are accepted as they fit the situation. While this theory offers insight into why norms develop, it leaves undefined the nature of norms, how they come to be accepted by the crowd, and how they spread through the crowd.

Value-Added Theory

Neil Smelser’s (1962) meticulous categorization of crowd behavior, called value-added theoryis a perspective within the functionalist tradition based on the idea that several conditions must be in place for collective behavior to occur. Each condition adds to the likelihood that collective behavior will occur. The first condition is structural conduciveness, which occurs when people are aware of the problem and have the opportunity to gather, ideally in an open area. Structural strain, the second condition, refers to people’s expectations about the situation at hand being unmet, causing tension and strain. The next condition is the growth and spread of a generalized belief, wherein a problem is clearly identified and attributed to a person or group.

Fourth, precipitating factors spur collective behavior; this is the emergence of a dramatic event. The fifth condition is mobilization for action, when leaders emerge to direct a crowd to action. The final condition relates to action by the agents. Called social control, it is the only way to end the collective behavior episode (Smelser 1962).

A real-life example of these conditions occurred after the fatal police shooting of teenager Michael Brown, an unarmed eighteen-year-old African American, in Ferguson, MO on August 9, 2014. The shooting drew national attention almost immediately. A large group of mostly black, local residents assembled in protest—a classic example of structural conduciveness. When the community perceived that the police were not acting in the people’s interest and were withholding the name of the officer, the structural strain became evident. A growing generalized belief evolved as the crowd of protesters was met with heavily armed police in military-style protective uniforms accompanied by an armored vehicle. The precipitating factor of the arrival of the police spurred greater collective behavior as the residents mobilized by assembling a parade down the street. Ultimately they were met with tear gas, pepper spray, and rubber bullets used by the police acting as agents of social control. The element of social control escalated over the following days until August 18, when the governor called in the National Guard.

 
Masked officer with a shield.
Figure 15.15 Agents of social control bring collective behavior to an end. (Photo courtesy of hozinja/flickr)

Assembling Perspective

Interactionist sociologist Clark McPhail (1991) developed the assembling perspectiveanother system for understanding collective behavior that credited individuals in crowds as rational beings. Unlike previous theories, this theory refocuses attention from collective behavior to collective action. Remember that collective behavior is a noninstitutionalized gathering, whereas collective action is based on a shared interest. McPhail’s theory focused primarily on the processes associated with crowd behavior, plus the lifecycle of gatherings. He identified several instances of convergent or collective behavior, as shown in the chart below.

Type of crowd Description Example
Convergence clusters Family and friends who travel together Carpooling parents take several children to the movies
Convergent orientation Group all facing the same direction A semi-circle around a stage
Collective vocalization Sounds or noises made collectively Screams on a roller coaster
Collective verbalization Collective and simultaneous participation in a speech or song Pledge of Allegiance in the school classroom
Collective gesticulation Body parts forming symbols The YMCA dance
Collective manipulation Objects collectively moved around Holding signs at a protest rally
Collective locomotion The direction and rate of movement to the event Children running to an ice cream truck
Table 15.1 Clark McPhail identified various circumstances of convergent and collective behavior (McPhail 1991).

As useful as this is for understanding the components of how crowds come together, many sociologists criticize its lack of attention to the large cultural context of the described behaviors, instead focusing on individual actions.

15.6 Social Movements

Learning Objectives

  • Demonstrate awareness of social movements on a state, national, and global level
  • Distinguish between different types of social movements
  • Identify stages of social movements
  • Discuss theoretical perspectives on social movements, like resource mobilization, framing, and new social movement theory

Social movements are purposeful, organized groups that strive to work toward a common social goal. While most of us learned about social movements in history classes, we tend to take for granted the fundamental changes they caused —and we may be completely unfamiliar with the trend toward global social movements. But from the antitobacco movement that has worked to outlaw smoking in public buildings and raise the cost of cigarettes, to political uprisings throughout the Arab world, movements are creating social change on a global scale.

Levels of Social Movements

Movements happen in our towns, in our nation, and around the world. Let’s take a look at examples of social movements, from local to global. No doubt you can think of others on all of these levels, especially since modern technology has allowed us a near-constant stream of information about the quest for social change around the world.

Local

Chicago is a city of highs and lows, from corrupt politicians and failing schools to innovative education programs and a thriving arts scene. Not surprisingly, it has been home to a number of social movements over time. Currently, AREA Chicago is a social movement focused on “building a socially just city” (AREA Chicago 2011). The organization seeks to “create relationships and sustain community through art, research, education, and activism” (AREA Chicago 2011). The movement offers online tools like the Radicalendar––a calendar for getting radical and connected––and events such as an alternative to the traditional Independence Day picnic. Through its offerings, AREA Chicago gives local residents a chance to engage in a movement to help build a socially just city.

State

Texas state flag.
Figure 15.16 Texas Secede! is an organization that would like Texas to secede from the United States. (Photo courtesy of Tim Pearce/flickr)

At the other end of the political spectrum from AREA Chicago is the Texas Secede! social movement in Texas. This statewide organization promotes the idea that Texas can and should secede from the United States to become an independent republic. The organization, which as of 2014 has over 6,000 “likes” on Facebook, references both Texas and national history in promoting secession. The movement encourages Texans to return to their rugged and individualistic roots and to stand up to what proponents believe is the theft of their rights and property by the U.S. government (Texas Secede! 2009).

National

Gay marriage is a polarizing issue on the national level and has led to the development of many activist groups. While the legal battle is being played out state by state, the issue is a national one.

The Human Rights Campaign, a nationwide organization that advocates for LGBT civil rights, has been active for over thirty years and claims more than a million members. One focus of the organization is its Americans for Marriage Equality campaign. Using public celebrities such as athletes, musicians, and political figures, it seeks to engage the public in the issue of equal rights under the law. The campaign raises awareness of the over 1,100 different rights, benefits, and protections provided on the basis of marital status under federal law and seeks to educate the public about why these protections should be available to all committed couples regardless of gender (Human Rights Campaign 2014).

A movement on the opposite end is the National Organization for Marriage, an organization that funds campaigns to stop same-sex marriage (National Organization for Marriage 2014). Both these organizations work on the national stage and seek to engage people through grassroots efforts to push their message. In February 2011, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder released a statement saying President Barack Obama had concluded that “due to a number of factors, including a documented history of discrimination, classification based on sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard of scrutiny.” The statement said, “Section 3 of DOMA [the Defense of Marriage Act of 1993], as applied to legally married same-sex couples, fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional.” With that the Department was instructed not to defend the statute in such cases (Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs 2011; AP/Huffington Post 2011).

 
A photo of two recently married men who are smiling.
Figure 15.17 At the time of this writing, more than thirty states and the District of Columbia allow marriage for same-sex couples. State constitutional bans are more difficult to overturn than mere state bans because of the higher threshold of votes required to change a constitution. Now that the Supreme Court has stricken a key part of the Defense of Marriage Act, same-sex couples married in states that allow it are now entitled to federal benefits afforded to heterosexual couples (CNN 2014). (Photo courtesy of Jose Antonio Navas/flickr).

Global

Social organizations worldwide take stands on such general areas of concern as poverty, sex trafficking, and the use of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) in food. Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) are sometimes formed to support such movements, such as the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movement (FOAM). Global efforts to reduce poverty are represented by the Oxford Committee for Famine Relief (OXFAM), among others. The Fair Trade movement exists to protect and support food producers in developing countries. Occupy Wall Street, although initially a local movement, also went global throughout Europe and, as the chapter’s introductory photo shows, the Middle East.

Types of Social Movements

We know that social movements can occur on the local, national, or even global stage. Are there other patterns or classifications that can help us understand them? Sociologist David Aberle (1966) addresses this question by developing categories that distinguish among social movements based on what they want to change and how much change they want. Reform movements seek to change something specific about the social structure. Examples include antinuclear groups, Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD), the Dreamers movement for immigration reform, and the Human Rights Campaign’s advocacy for Marriage Equality. Revolutionary movements seek to completely change every aspect of society. These include the 1960s counterculture movement, including the revolutionary group The Weather Underground, as well as anarchist collectives. Texas Secede! is a revolutionary movement. Religious/Redemptive movements are “meaning seeking,” and their goal is to provoke inner change or spiritual growth in individuals. Organizations pushing these movements include Heaven’s Gate or the Branch Davidians. The latter is still in existence despite government involvement that led to the deaths of numerous Branch Davidian members in 1993. Alternative movements are focused on self-improvement and limited, specific changes to individual beliefs and behavior. These include trends like transcendental meditation or a macrobiotic diet. Resistance movements seek to prevent or undo change to the social structure. The Ku Klux Klan, the Minutemen, and pro-life movements fall into this category.

Stages of Social Movements

Later sociologists studied the lifecycle of social movements—how they emerge, grow, and in some cases, die out. Blumer (1969) and Tilly (1978) outline a four-stage process. In the preliminary stage, people become aware of an issue, and leaders emerge. This is followed by the coalescence stage when people join together and organize in order to publicize the issue and raise awareness. In the institutionalization stage, the movement no longer requires grassroots volunteerism: it is an established organization, typically with a paid staff. When people fall away and adopt a new movement, the movement successfully brings about the change it sought, or when people no longer take the issue seriously, the movement falls into the decline stage. Each social movement discussed earlier belongs to one of these four stages. Where would you put them on the list?

Big Picture

Social Media and Social Change: A Match Made in Heaven

 
A man leaning over a laptop, typing
Figure 15.18 In 2008, Obama’s campaign used social media to tweet, like, and friend its way to victory. (Photo courtesy of bradleyolin/flickr)

Chances are you have been asked to tweet, friend, like, or donate online for a cause. Maybe you were one of the many people who, in 2010, helped raise over $3 million in relief efforts for Haiti through cell phone text donations. Or maybe you follow presidential candidates on Twitter and retweet their messages to your followers. Perhaps you have “liked” a local nonprofit on Facebook, prompted by one of your neighbors or friends who liked it too. Nowadays, social movements are woven throughout our social media activities. After all, social movements start by activating people.

Referring to the ideal type stages discussed above, you can see that social media has the potential to dramatically transform how people get involved. Look at stage one, the preliminary stage: people become aware of an issue, and leaders emerge. Imagine how social media speeds up this step. Suddenly, a shrewd user of Twitter can alert his thousands of followers about an emerging cause or an issue on his mind. Issue awareness can spread at the speed of a click, with thousands of people across the globe becoming informed at the same time. In a similar vein, those who are savvy and engaged with social media emerge as leaders. Suddenly, you don’t need to be a powerful public speaker. You don’t even need to leave your house. You can build an audience through social media without ever meeting the people you are inspiring.

In the next stage, the coalescence stage, social media also is transformative. Coalescence is the point when people join together to publicize the issue and get organized. President Obama’s 2008 campaign was a case study in organizing through social media. Using Twitter and other online tools, the campaign engaged volunteers who had typically not bothered with politics and empowered those who were more active to generate still more activity. It is no coincidence that Obama’s earlier work experience included grassroots community organizing. What is the difference between his campaign and the work he did in Chicago neighborhoods decades earlier? The ability to organize without regard to geographical boundaries by using social media. In 2009, when student protests erupted in Tehran, social media was considered so important to the organizing effort that the U.S. State Department actually asked Twitter to suspend scheduled maintenance so that a vital tool would not be disabled during the demonstrations.

So what is the real impact of this technology on the world? Did Twitter bring down Mubarak in Egypt? Author Malcolm Gladwell (2010) doesn’t think so. In an article in New Yorker magazine, Gladwell tackles what he considers the myth that social media gets people more engaged. He points out that most of the tweets relating to the Iran protests were in English and sent from Western accounts (instead of people on the ground). Rather than increasing engagement, he contends that social media only increases participation; after all, the cost of participation is so much lower than the cost of engagement. Instead of risking being arrested, shot with rubber bullets, or sprayed with fire hoses, social media activists can click “like” or retweet a message from the comfort and safety of their desks (Gladwell 2010).

There are, though, good cases to be made for the power of social media in propelling social movements. In the article, “Parrhesia and Democracy: Truth-telling, WikiLeaks and the Arab Spring,” Theresa Sauter and Gavin Kendall (2011) describe the importance of social media in the Arab Spring uprisings. Parrhesia means “the practice of truth-telling,” which describes the protestors’ use of social media to make up for the lack of coverage and even misrepresentation of events by state-controlled media. The Tunisian blogger Lina Ben Mhenni posted photographs and videos on Facebook and Twitter of events exposing the violence committed by the government. In Egypt, the journalist Asmaa Mahfouz used Facebook to gather large numbers of people in Tahrir Square in the capital city of Cairo. Sauter and Kendall maintain that it was the use of Web 2.0 technologies that allowed activists not only to share events with the world but also to organize the actions.

When the Egyptian government shut down the internet to stop the use of social media, the group Anonymous, a hacking organization noted for online acts of civil disobedience initiated “Operation Egypt” and sent thousands of faxes to keep the public informed of their government’s activities (CBS Interactive Inc. 2014) as well as attacking the government’s web site (Wagensiel 2011). In its Facebook press release, the group stated the following: “Anonymous wants you to offer free access to uncensored media in your entire country. When you ignore this message, not only will we attack your government websites, but Anonymous will also make sure that the international media sees the horrid reality you impose upon your people.”

Sociologists have identified high-risk activism, such as the civil rights movement, as a “strong-tie” phenomenon, meaning that people are far more likely to stay engaged and not run home to safety if they have close friends who are also engaged. The people who dropped out of the movement––who went home after the danger got too great––did not display any less ideological commitment. But they lacked a strong-tie connection to other people who were staying. Social media, by its very makeup, is a “weak tie” (McAdam and Paulsen 1993). People follow or friend people they have never met. But while these online acquaintances are a source of information and inspiration, the lack of engaged personal contact limits the level of risk we’ll take on their behalf.

 

 
A screenshot of the Twitter page for #Haiti donations is shown here. The tweet reads: Donation Update: Over $21 Million in $10 donations raised for the people of #Haiti through the @RedCross Text HAITI to 90999 campaign.
Figure 15.19 After a devastating earthquake in 2010, Twitter and the Red Cross raised millions for Haiti relief efforts through phone donations alone. (Photo courtesy of Cambodia4KidsOrg/flickr)

Theoretical Perspectives on Social Movements

Most theories of social movements are called collective action theories, indicating the purposeful nature of this form of collective behavior. The following three theories are but a few of the many classic and modern theories developed by social scientists.

Resource Mobilization

McCarthy and Zald (1977) conceptualize resource mobilization theory as a way to explain movement success in terms of the ability to acquire resources and mobilize individuals. Resources are primarily time and money, and the more of both, the greater the power of organized movements. Numbers of social movement organizations (SMOs), which are single social movement groups, with the same goals, constitute a social movement industry (SMI). Together they create what McCarthy and Zald (1977) refer to as “the sum of all social movements in a society.”

Resource Mobilization and the Civil Rights Movement

An example of resource mobilization theory is the activity of the civil rights movement in the decade between the mid-1950s and the mid-1960s. Social movements had existed before, notably the Women’s Suffrage Movement and a long line of labor movements, thus constituting an existing social movement sector, which is the multiple social movement industries in a society, even if they have widely varying constituents and goals. The civil rights movement had also existed well before Rosa Parks refused to give up her bus seat to a white man. Less known is that Parks was a member of the NAACP and trained in leadership (A&E Television Networks, LLC. 2014). But her actions that day were spontaneous and unplanned (Schmitz 2014). Her arrest triggered a public outcry that led to the famous Montgomery bus boycott, turning the movement into what we now think of as the “civil rights movement” (Schmitz 2014).

Mobilization had to begin immediately. Boycotting the bus made other means of transportation necessary, which were provided through carpools. Churches and their ministers joined the struggle, and the protest organization In Friendship was formed as well as The Friendly Club and the Club From Nowhere. A social movement industry, which is the collection of social movement organizations that are striving toward similar goals, was growing.

Martin Luther King Jr. emerged during these events to become the charismatic leader of the movement, gained respect from elites in the federal government, and was aided by even more emerging SMOs such as the Student Non-Violent Coordinating Committee (SNCC), the Congress of Racial Equality (CORE), the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC), among others. Several still exist today. Although the movement in that period was an overall success, and laws were changed (even if not attitudes), the “movement” continues. So do struggles to keep the gains that were made, even as the U.S. Supreme Court has recently weakened the Voter Rights Act of 1965, once again making it more difficult for black Americans and other minorities to vote.

 
Pictured is a flow chart showing the tiers of the Social Movement Sector. At the top of the chart is the social movement sector. Below that box is the social movement industries. Three boxes come from that one; and, they are the animal right industry, the marriage rights industry, and the food movement industry. One box comes from the animal rights industry box; and, it is social movement organization. Two boxes come from the social movement organization box; and, they are People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) and Animal Liberation Front (ALF). One box comes from the marriage rights industry; and, it is social movement organizations. Two more boxes come from the social movement organizations box; and, they are the Human Rights Campaign, and the National Organization for Marriage. One box come from the food movement industry box; and, it is social movement organizations. Two more boxes come from the social movement organizations box; and, they are the Slow Food Movement, and the Locavore Movement.
Figure 15.20 Multiple social movement organizations concerned about the same issue form a social movement industry. A society’s many social movement industries comprise its social movement sector. With so many options, to whom will you give your time and money?

Framing/Frame Analysis

Over the past several decades, sociologists have developed the concept of frames to explain how individuals identify and understand social events and which norms they should follow in any given situation (Goffman 1974; Snow et al. 1986; Benford and Snow 2000). Imagine entering a restaurant. Your “frame” immediately provides you with a behavior template. It probably does not occur to you to wear pajamas to a fine-dining establishment, throw food at other patrons, or spit your drink onto the table. However, eating food at a sleepover pizza party provides you with an entirely different behavior template. It might be perfectly acceptable to eat in your pajamas and maybe even throw popcorn at others or guzzle drinks from cans.

Successful social movements use three kinds of frames (Snow and Benford 1988) to further their goals. The first type, diagnostic framing, states the problem in a clear, easily understood way. When applying diagnostic frames, there are no shades of gray: instead, there is the belief that what “they” do is wrong and this is how “we” will fix it. The anti-gay marriage movement is an example of diagnostic framing with its uncompromising insistence that marriage is only between a man and a woman. Prognostic framing, the second type, offers a solution and states how it will be implemented. Some examples of this frame, when looking at the issue of marriage equality as framed by the anti-gay marriage movement, include the plan to restrict marriage to “one man/one woman” or to allow only “civil unions” instead of marriages. As you can see, there may be many competing prognostic frames even within social movements adhering to similar diagnostic frames. Finally, motivational framing is the call to action: what should you do once you agree with the diagnostic frame and believe in the prognostic frame? These frames are action-oriented. In the gay marriage movement, a call to action might encourage you to vote “no” on Proposition 8 in California (a move to limit marriage to male-female couples), or conversely, to contact your local congressperson to express your viewpoint that marriage should be restricted to male-female couples.

With so many similar diagnostic frames, some groups find it best to join together to maximize their impact. When social movements link their goals to the goals of other social movements and merge into a single group, a frame alignment process (Snow et al. 1986) occurs—an ongoing and intentional means of recruiting participants to the movement.

This frame alignment process has four aspects: bridging, amplification, extension, and transformation. Bridging describes a “bridge” that connects uninvolved individuals and unorganized or ineffective groups with social movements that, though structurally unconnected, nonetheless share similar interests or goals. These organizations join together to create a new, stronger social movement organization. Can you think of examples of different organizations with a similar goal that have banded together?

In the amplification model, organizations seek to expand their core ideas to gain a wider, more universal appeal. By expanding their ideas to include a broader range, they can mobilize more people for their cause. For example, the Slow Food movement extends its arguments in support of local food to encompass reduced energy consumption, pollution, obesity from eating more healthfully, and more.

In extension, social movements agree to mutually promote each other, even when the two social movement organization’s goals don’t necessarily relate to each other’s immediate goals. This often occurs when organizations are sympathetic to each others’ causes, even if they are not directly aligned, such as women’s equal rights and the civil rights movement.

Figure (a) shows women’s suffrage marchers. Figure (b) shows a large group of marchers for civil rights. Figure (c) shows people waving a U.S. flag and a rainbow flag.
Figure 15.21 Extension occurs when social movements have sympathetic causes. Women’s rights, racial equality, and LGBT advocacy are all human rights issues. (Photos (a) and (b) courtesy of Wikimedia Commons; Photo (c) courtesy of Charlie Nguyen/flickr)

Transformation means a complete revision of goals. Once a movement has succeeded, it risks losing relevance. If it wants to remain active, the movement has to change with the transformation or risk becoming obsolete. For instance, when the women’s suffrage movement gained women the right to vote, members turned their attention to advocating equal rights and campaigning to elect women to office. In short, transformation is an evolution in the existing diagnostic or prognostic frames that generally achieves a total conversion of the movement.

New Social Movement Theory

New social movement theory, the development of European social scientists in the 1950s and 1960s, attempts to explain the proliferation of postindustrial and postmodern movements that are difficult to analyze using traditional social movement theories. Rather than being one specific theory, it is more of a perspective that revolves around understanding movements as they relate to politics, identity, culture, and social change. Some of these more complex interrelated movements include ecofeminism, which focuses on the patriarchal society as the source of environmental problems, and the transgender rights movement. Sociologist Steven Buechler (2000) suggests that we should be looking at the bigger picture in which these movements arise—shifting to a macro-level, global analysis of social movements.

The Movement to Legalize Marijuana

The early history of marijuana in the United States includes its use as an over-the-counter medicine as well as various industrial applications. Its recreational use eventually became a focus of regulatory concern. Public opinion, swayed by a powerful propaganda campaign by the Federal Bureau of Narcotics in the 1930s, remained firmly opposed to the use of marijuana for decades. In the 1936 church-financed propaganda film “Reefer Madness,” marijuana was portrayed as a dangerous drug that caused insanity and violent behavior.

One reason for the recent shift in public attitudes about marijuana, and the social movement pushing for its decriminalization, is a more-informed understanding of its effects that largely contradict its earlier characterization. The public has also become aware that penalties for possession have been significantly disproportionate along racial lines. U.S. Census and FBI data reveal that blacks in the United States are between two to eight times more likely than whites to be arrested for possession of marijuana (Urbina 2013; Matthews 2013). Further, the resulting incarceration costs and prison overcrowding are causing states to look closely at decriminalization and legalization.

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) 2022, as of February 3, 2022, 37 states, four territories, and the District of Columbia allow the medical use of cannabis products. The conservative state of Mississippi passed a ballot initiative, in November of 2020, to allow marijuana for medical use, but it was overturned by the state supreme court on May 14, 2021. The legislature passed new legislation which was signed by the governor on February 2, 2022 (NCSL 2022). In 2022, 19 states, have enacted measures to regulate cannabis for adult nonmedical use (NCSL 2022).

15.7 Social Change

Learning Objectives

  • Explain how technology, social institutions, population, and the environment can bring about social change
  • Discuss the importance of modernization in relation to social change

Collective behavior and social movements are just two of the forces driving social change, which is the change in society created through social movements as well as external factors like environmental shifts or technological innovations. Essentially, any disruptive shift in the status quo, be it intentional or random, human-caused or natural, can lead to social change. Below are some of the likely causes.

Causes of Social Change

Changes to technology, social institutions, population, and the environment, alone or in some combination, create change. Below, we will discuss how these act as agents of social change, and we’ll examine real-world examples. We will focus on four agents of change that social scientists recognize: technology, social institutions, population, and the environment.

Technology

Some would say that improving technology has made our lives easier. Imagine what your day would be like without the internet, the automobile, or electricity. In The World Is Flat, Thomas Friedman (2005) argues that technology is a driving force behind globalization, while the other forces of social change (social institutions, population, environment) play comparatively minor roles. He suggests that we can view globalization as occurring in three distinct periods. First, globalization was driven by military expansion, powered by horsepower and wind power. The countries best able to take advantage of these power sources expanded the most, and exert control over the politics of the globe from the late fifteenth century to around the year 1800. The second shorter period from approximately 1800 C.E. to 2000 C.E. consisted of a globalizing economy. Steam and rail power were the guiding forces of social change and globalization in this period. Finally, Friedman brings us to the post-millennial era. In this period of globalization, change is driven by technology, particularly the internet (Friedman 2005).

But also consider that technology can create change in the other three forces social scientists link to social change. Advances in medical technology allow otherwise infertile women to bear children, which indirectly leads to an increase in population. Advances in agricultural technology have allowed us to genetically alter and patent food products, which change our environment in innumerable ways. From the way we educate children in the classroom to the way we grow the food we eat, technology has impacted all aspects of modern life.

Of course, there are drawbacks. The increasing gap between the technological haves and have-nots––sometimes called the digital divide––occurs both locally and globally. Further, there are added security risks: the loss of privacy, the risk of total system failure (like the Y2K panic at the turn of the millennium), and the added vulnerability created by technological dependence. Think about the technology that goes into keeping nuclear power plants running safely and securely. What happens if an earthquake or other disaster, like in the case of Japan’s Fukushima plant, causes the technology to malfunction, not to mention the possibility of a systematic attack on our nation’s relatively vulnerable technological infrastructure?

Sociology in the Real World

Crowdsourcing: Using the Web to Get Things Done

Millions of people today walk around with their heads tilted toward a small device held in their hands. Perhaps you are reading this textbook on a phone or tablet. People in developed societies now take communication technology for granted. How has this technology affected social change in our society and others? One very positive way is crowdsourcing.

Thanks to the web, digital crowdsourcing is the process of obtaining needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people, especially from an online community rather than from traditional employees or suppliers. Web-based companies such as Kickstarter have been created precisely for the purposes of raising large amounts of money in a short period of time, notably by sidestepping the traditional financing process. This book, or virtual book, is the product of a kind of crowdsourcing effort. It has been written and reviewed by several authors in a variety of fields to give you free access to a large amount of data produced at a low cost. The largest example of crowdsourced data is Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia which is the result of thousands of volunteers adding and correcting material.

Perhaps the most striking use of crowdsourcing is disaster relief. By tracking tweets and e-mails and organizing the data in order of urgency and quantity, relief agencies can address the most urgent calls for help, such as medical aid, food, shelter, or rescue. On January 12, 2010, a devastating earthquake hit the nation of Haiti. By January 25, a crisis map had been created from more than 2,500 incident reports, and more reports were added every day. The same technology was used to assist victims of the Japanese earthquake and tsunami in 2011.

The Darker Side of Technology: Electronic Aggression in the Information Age

The U.S. Center for Disease Control (CDC) uses the term “electronic aggression” to describe “any type of harassment or bullying that occurs through e-mail, a chat room, instant messaging, a website (including blogs), or text messaging” (CDC, n.d.) We generally think of this as cyberbullying. A 2011 study by the U.S. Department of Education found that 27.8 percent of students aged twelve through eighteen reported experiencing bullying. From the same sample, 9 percent specifically reported having been a victim of cyberbullying (Robers et al. 2013).

Cyberbullying represents a powerful change in modern society. William F. Ogburn (1922) might have been describing it nearly a century ago when he defined “cultural lag,” which occurs when material culture precedes nonmaterial culture. That is, society may not fully comprehend all the consequences of new technology and so may initially reject it (such as stem cell research) or embrace it, sometimes with unintended negative consequences (such as pollution).

Cyberbullying is a special feature of the internet. Unique to electronic aggression is that it can happen twenty-four hours a day, every day; it can reach a child (or an adult) even though she or he might otherwise feel safe in a locked house. The messages and images may be posted anonymously and to a very wide audience, and they might even be impossible to trace. Finally, once posted, the texts and images are very hard to delete. Its effects range from the use of alcohol and drugs to lower self-esteem, health problems, and even suicide (CDC, n.d.).

Sociology in the Real World

The Story of Megan Meier

According to the Megan Meier Foundation website (2014a), Megan Meier had a lifelong struggle with weight, attention deficit disorder, and depression. But then a sixteen-year-old boy named Josh Evans asked Megan, who was thirteen years old, to be friends on the social networking website MySpace. The two began communicating online regularly, though they never met in person or spoke on the phone. Now Megan finally knew a boy who, she believed, really thought she was pretty.

But things changed, according to the Megan Meier Foundation website (2014b). Josh began saying he didn’t want to be friends anymore, and the messages became cruel on October 16, 2006, when Josh concluded by telling Megan, “The world would be a better place without you.” The cyberbullying escalated when additional classmates and friends on MySpace began writing disturbing messages and bulletins. That night Megan hanged herself in her bedroom closet, three weeks before what would have been her fourteenth birthday.

According to an ABC News article titled, “Parents: Cyber Bullying Led to Teen’s Death” (2007), it was only later that a neighbor informed Megan’s parents that Josh was not a real person. Instead, “Josh’s” account was created by the mother of a girl who used to be friends with Megan.

You can find out more of Megan’s story at her mother’s website: http://www.meganmeierfoundation.org/

Social Institutions

Each change in a single social institution leads to changes in all social institutions. For example, the industrialization of society meant that there was no longer a need for large families to produce enough manual labor to run a farm. Further, new job opportunities were in close proximity to urban centers where living space was at a premium. The result is that the average family size shrunk significantly.

This same shift toward industrial corporate entities also changed the way we view government involvement in the private sector, created the global economy, provided new political platforms, and even spurred new religions and new forms of religious worship like Scientology. It has also informed the way we educate our children: originally schools were set up to accommodate an agricultural calendar so children could be home to work the fields in the summer, and even today, teaching models are largely based on preparing students for industrial jobs, despite that being an outdated need. A shift in one area, such as industrialization, means an interconnected impact across social institutions.

Population

Population composition is changing at every level of society. Births increase in one nation and decrease in another. Some families delay childbirth while others start bringing children into their folds early. Population changes can be due to random external forces, like an epidemic, or shifts in other social institutions, as described above. But regardless of why and how it happens, population trends have a tremendous interrelated impact on all other aspects of society.

In the United States, we are experiencing an increase in our senior population as baby boomers begin to retire, which will in turn change the way many of our social institutions are organized. For example, there is an increased demand for housing in warmer climates, a massive shift in the need for elder care and assisted living facilities and growing awareness of elder abuse. There is concern about labor shortages as boomers retire, not to mention the knowledge gap as the most senior and accomplished leaders in different sectors start to leave. Further, as this large generation leaves the workforce, the loss of tax income and pressure on pension and retirement plans means that the financial stability of the country is threatened.

Globally, often the countries with the highest fertility rates are least able to absorb and attend to the needs of a growing population. Family planning is a large step in ensuring that families are not burdened with more children than they can care for. On a macro level, the increased population, particularly in the poorest parts of the globe, also leads to increased stress on the planet’s resources.

The Environment

Turning to human ecology, we know that individuals and the environment affect each other. As human populations move into more vulnerable areas, we see an increase in the number of people affected by natural disasters, and we see that human interaction with the environment increases the impact of those disasters. Part of this is simply the numbers: the more people there are on the planet, the more likely it is that some will be affected by a natural disaster.

But it goes beyond that. Movements like 350.org describe how we have already seen five extinctions of massive amounts of life on the planet, and the crisis of global change has put us on the verge of yet another. According to their website, “The number 350 means climate safety: to preserve a livable planet, scientists tell us we must reduce the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere from its current level of 400 parts per million to below 350 ppm” (350.org).

The environment is best described as an ecosystem, one that exists as the interplay of multiple parts including 8.7 million species of life. However, dozens of species are going extinct every day, a number 1,000 times to 10,000 times the normal “background rate” and the highest rate since the dinosaurs disappeared 65 million years ago. The Center for Biological Diversity states that this extinction crisis, unlike previous ones caused by natural disasters, is “caused almost entirely by us” (Center for Biological Diversity, n.d.). The growth of the human population, currently over seven billion and expected to rise to nine or ten billion by 2050, perfectly correlates with the rising extinction rate of life on earth.

Sociology in the Real World

Hurricane Katrina: When It All Comes Together

The four key elements that affect social change that is described in this chapter are the environment, technology, social institutions, and population. In 2005, New Orleans was struck by a devastating hurricane. But it was not just the hurricane that was disastrous. It was the converging of all four of these elements, and the text below will connect the elements by putting the words in parentheses.

Before Hurricane Katrina (environment) hit, poorly coordinated evacuation efforts had left about 25 percent of the population, almost entirely African Americans who lacked private transportation, to suffer the consequences of the coming storm (demographics). Then “after the storm, when the levees broke, thousands more [refugees] came. And the city buses, meant to take them to proper shelters, were underwater” (Sullivan 2005). No public transportation was provided, drinking water and communications were delayed, and FEMA, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (institutions), was headed by an appointee with no real experience in emergency management. Those who were eventually evacuated did not know where they were being sent or how to contact family members. African Americans were sent the farthest from their homes. When the displaced began to return, public housing had not been reestablished, yet the Superdome stadium, which had served as a temporary disaster shelter, had been rebuilt. Homeowners received financial support, but renters did not.

As it turns out, it was not entirely the hurricane that cost the lives of 1,500 people, but the fact that the city’s storm levees (technology), which had been built too low and which failed to meet numerous other safety specifications, gave way, flooding the lower portions of the city, occupied almost entirely by African Americans.

Journalist Naomi Klein, in her book The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism, presents a theory of a “triple shock,” consisting of an initial disaster, an economic shock that replaces public services with private (for-profit) ones, and a third shock consisting of the intense policing of the remaining public. Klein supports her claim by quoting then-Congressman Richard Baker as saying, “We finally cleaned up public housing in New Orleans. We couldn’t do it, but God did.” She quotes developer Joseph Canizaro as stating, “I think we have a clean sheet to start again. And with that clean sheet, we have some very big opportunities.”

One clean sheet was that New Orleans began to replace public schools with charters, breaking the teachers’ union and firing all public school teachers (Mullins 2014). Public housing was seriously reduced and the poor were forced out altogether or into the suburbs far from medical and other facilities (The Advocate 2013). Finally, by relocating African Americans and changing the ratio of African Americans to whites, New Orleans changed its entire demographic makeup.

Modernization

Modernization describes the processes that increase the amount of specialization and differentiation of structure in societies resulting in the move from an undeveloped society to a developed, technologically driven society (Irwin 1975). By this definition, the level of modernity within a society is judged by the sophistication of its technology, particularly as it relates to infrastructure, industry, and the like. However, it is important to note the inherent ethnocentric bias of such an assessment. Why do we assume that those living in semi-peripheral and peripheral nations would find it so wonderful to become more like the core nations? Is modernization always positive?

One contradiction of all kinds of technology is that they often promise time-saving benefits, but somehow fail to deliver. How many times have you ground your teeth in frustration at an internet site that refused to load or at a dropped call on your cell phone? Despite time-saving devices such as dishwashers, washing machines, and, now, remote control vacuum cleaners, the average amount of time spent on housework is the same today as it was fifty years ago. And the dubious benefits of 24/7 e-mail and immediate information have simply increased the amount of time employees are expected to be responsive and available. While once businesses had to travel at the speed of the U.S. postal system, sending something off and waiting until it was received before the next stage, today the immediacy of information transfer means there are no such breaks.

Further, the internet bought us information, but at a cost. The morass of information means that there is as much poor information available as trustworthy sources. There is a delicate line to walk when core nations seek to bring the assumed benefits of modernization to more traditional cultures. For one, there are obvious procapitalist biases that go into such attempts, and it is short-sighted for western governments and social scientists to assume all other countries aspire to follow in their footsteps. Additionally, there can be a kind of neo-liberal defense of rural cultures, ignoring the often crushing poverty and diseases that exist in peripheral nations and focusing only on the nostalgic mythology of the happy peasant. It takes a very careful hand to understand both the need for cultural identity and preservation as well as the hopes for future growth.

Key Terms

acting crowds
crowds of people who are focused on a specific action or goal
alternative movements
social movements that limit themselves to self-improvement changes in individuals
assembling perspective
a theory that credits individuals in crowds as behaving as rational thinkers and views crowds as engaging in purposeful behavior and collective action
casual crowds
people who share close proximity without really interacting
collective behavior
a noninstitutionalized activity in which several people voluntarily engage
conventional crowds
people who come together for a regularly scheduled event
crowd
a fairly large number of people who share close proximity
crowdsourcing
the process of obtaining needed services, ideas, or content by soliciting contributions from a large group of people
cyberfeminism
the application to and promotion of feminism online
design patents
patents that are granted when someone has invented a new and original design for a manufactured product
diagnostic framing
a social problem that is stated in a clear, easily understood manner
digital divide
the uneven access to technology around race, class, and geographic lines
emergent norm theory
a perspective that emphasizes the importance of social norms in crowd behavior
e-readiness
the ability to sort through, interpret, and process digital knowledge
expressive crowds
crowds who share opportunities to express emotions
evolutionary model of technological change
a breakthrough in one form of technology that leads to a number of variations, from which a prototype emerges, followed by a period of slight adjustments to the technology, interrupted by a breakthrough
flash mob
a large group of people who gather together in a spontaneous activity that lasts a limited amount of time
frame alignment process
using bridging, amplification, extension, and transformation as an ongoing and intentional means of recruiting participants to a movement
gatekeeping
the sorting process by which thousands of possible messages are shaped into a mass media-appropriate form and reduced to a manageable amount
knowledge gap
the gap in information that builds as groups grow up without access to technology
mass
a relatively large group with a common interest, even if they may not be in close proximity
media
all print, digital, and electronic means of communication
media consolidation
a process by which fewer and fewer owners control the majority of media outlets
media globalization
the worldwide integration of media through the cross-cultural exchange of ideas
modernization
the process that increases the amount of specialization and differentiation of structure in societies
motivational framing
a call to action
neo-Luddites
those who see technology as a symbol of the coldness of modern life
net neutrality
the principle that all internet data should be treated equally by internet service providers
new media
all interactive forms of information exchange
new social movement theory
a theory that attempts to explain the proliferation of postindustrial and postmodern movements that are difficult to understand using traditional social movement theories
NGO
nongovernmental organizations working globally for numerous humanitarian and environmental causes
oligopoly
a situation in which a few firms dominate a marketplace
panoptic surveillance
a form of constant monitoring in which the observation posts are decentralized and the observed is never communicated with directly
planned obsolescence
the act of a technology company planning for a product to be obsolete or unable from the time it’s created
plant patents
patents that recognize the discovery of new plant types that can be asexually reproduced
prognostic framing
social movements that state a clear solution and a means of implementation
public
an unorganized, relatively diffuse group of people who share ideas
reform movements
movements that seek to change something specific about the social structure
religious/redemptive movements
movements that work to promote inner change or spiritual growth in individuals
resistance movements
those who seek to prevent or undo change to the social structure
resource mobilization theory
a theory that explains social movements’ success in terms of their ability to acquire resources and mobilize individuals
revolutionary movements
movements that seek to completely change every aspect of society
social change
the change in a society created through social movements as well as through external factors like environmental shifts or technological innovations
social movement
a purposeful organized group hoping to work toward a common social goal
social movement industry
the collection of social movement organizations that are striving toward similar goals
social movement organization
a single social movement group
social movement sector
the multiple social movement industries in a society, even if they have widely varying constituents and goals
technological diffusion
the spread of technology across borders
technological globalization
the cross-cultural development and exchange of technology
technology
the application of science to solve problems in daily life
technophiles
those who see technology as symbolizing the potential for a brighter future
utility patents
patents that are granted for the invention or discovery of any new and useful process, product, or machine
value-added theory
a functionalist perspective theory that posits that several preconditions must be in place for collective behavior to occur

Section Summary

15.1 Technology Today

Technology is the application of science to address the problems of daily life. The fast pace of technological advancement means the advancements are continuous, but not everyone has equal access. The gap created by this unequal access has been termed the digital divide. The knowledge gap refers to an effect of the digital divide: the lack of knowledge or information that keeps those who were not exposed to technology from gaining marketable skills.

15.2 Media and Technology in Society

Media and technology have been interwoven from the earliest days of human communication. The printing press, the telegraph, and the internet are all examples of their intersection. Mass media have allowed for more shared social experiences, but new media now create a seemingly endless amount of airtime for any and every voice that wants to be heard. Advertising has also changed with technology. New media allow consumers to bypass traditional advertising venues and cause companies to be more innovative and intrusive as they try to gain our attention.

15.3 Global Implications of Media and Technology

Technology drives globalization, but what that means can be hard to decipher. While some economists see technological advances leading to a more level playing field where anyone anywhere can be a global contender, the reality is that opportunity still clusters in geographically advantaged areas. Still, technological diffusion has led to the spread of more and more technology across borders into peripheral and semi-peripheral nations. However, true technological global equality is a long way off.

15.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Media and Technology

There are myriad theories about how society, technology, and media will progress. Functionalism sees the contribution that technology and media provide to the stability of society, from facilitating leisure time to increasing productivity. Conflict theorists are more concerned with how technology reinforces inequalities among communities, both within and among countries. They also look at how media typically give voice to the most powerful, and how new media might offer tools to help those who are disenfranchised. Symbolic interactionists see the symbolic uses of technology as signs of everything from a sterile futuristic world to a successful professional life.

15.5 Collective Behavior

Collective behavior is a noninstitutionalized activity in which several people voluntarily engage. There are three different forms of collective behavior: crowd, mass, and public. There are three main theories on collective behavior. The first, the emergent-norm perspective, emphasizes the importance of social norms in crowd behavior. The next, the value-added theory, is a functionalist perspective that states that several preconditions must be in place for collective behavior to occur. Finally, the assembling perspective focuses on collective action rather than collective behavior, addressing the processes associated with crowd behavior and the lifecycle and various categories of gatherings.

15.6 Social Movements

Social movements are purposeful, organized groups with the goal of either pushing toward change, giving a political voice to those without it, or gathering for some other common purpose. Social movements intersect with environmental changes, technological innovations, and other external factors to create social change. There is a myriad of catalysts that create social movements, and the reasons that people join are as varied as the participants themselves. Sociologists look at both the macro-and microanalytical reasons that social movements occur, take root, and ultimately succeed or fail.

15.7 Social Change

There are numerous and varied causes of social change. Four common causes, as recognized by social scientists, are technology, social institutions, population, and the environment. All four of these areas can impact when and how society changes. And they are all interrelated: a change in one area can lead to changes throughout. Modernization is a typical result of social change. Modernization refers to the process of increased differentiation and specialization within a society, particularly around its industry and infrastructure. While this assumes that more modern societies are better, there has been significant pushback on this Western-centric view that all peripheral and semi-peripheral countries should aspire to be like North America and Western Europe.

Section Quizzes

15.1 Technology Today

1Jerome is able to use the internet to select reliable sources for his research paper, but Charlie just copies large pieces of web pages and pastes them into his paper. Jerome has _____________ while Charlie does not.

  1. a functional perspective
  2. the knowledge gap
  3. e-readiness
  4. a digital divide

2. The ________ can be directly attributed to the digital divide because the differential ability to access the internet leads directly to a differential ability to use the knowledge found on the internet.

  1. digital divide
  2. knowledge gap
  3. feminist perspective
  4. e-gap

3. The fact that your cell phone is using outdated technology within a year or two of purchase is an example of ____________.

  1. the conflict perspective
  2. conspicuous consumption
  3. media
  4. planned obsolescence

4. The history of technology began _________.

  1. in the early stages of human societies
  2. with the invention of the computer
  3. during the Renaissance
  4. during the nineteenth century

15.2 Media and Technology in Society

5. When it comes to technology, media, and society, which of the following is true?
    1. Media can influence technology, but not society.
    2. Technology created media, but society has nothing to do with these.
    3. Technology, media, and society are bound and cannot be separated.
    4. Society influences media but is not connected to technology.

6. If the U.S. Patent Office were to issue a patent for a new type of tomato that tastes like a jellybean, it would be issuing a _________ patent?

  1. utility patent
  2. plant patent
  3. design patent
  4. The U.S. Patent Office does not issue a patent for plants.

7. Which of the following is the primary component of the evolutionary model of technological change?

  1. Technology should not be subject to patenting.
  2. Technology and the media evolve together.
  3. Technology can be traced back to the early stages of human society.
  4. A breakthrough in one form of technology leads to a number of variations, and technological developments.

8. Which of the following is not a form of new media?

  1. The cable television program Dexter
  2. Wikipedia
  3. Facebook
  4. A cooking blog written by Rachael Ray

9. Research regarding video game violence suggests that _________.

  1. boys who play violent video games become more aggressive, but girls do not
  2. girls who play violent video games become more aggressive, but boys do not
  3. violent video games have no connection to aggressive behavior
  4. violent video games lead to an increase in aggressive thought and behavior

10. Comic books, Wikipedia, MTV, and a commercial for Coca-Cola are all examples of:

  1. media
  2. symbolic interaction perspective
  3. e-readiness
  4. the digital divide

15.3 Global Implications of Media and Technology

11.  When Japanese scientists develop a new vaccine for swine flu and offer that technology to U.S. pharmaceutical companies, __________ has taken place.

  1. media globalization
  2. technological diffusion
  3. monetizing
  4. planned obsolescence

12. In the mid-90s, the U.S. government grew concerned that Microsoft was a _______________, exercising disproportionate control over the available choices and prices of computers.

  1. monopoly
  2. conglomerate
  3. oligopoly
  4. technological globalization

13. The movie Babel featured an international cast and was filmed on location in various nations. When it screened in theaters worldwide, it introduced a number of ideas and philosophies about cross-cultural connections. This might be an example of:

  1. technology
  2. conglomerating
  3. symbolic interaction
  4. media globalization

14. Which of the following is not a risk of media globalization?

  • The creation of cultural and ideological biases
  • The creation of local monopolies
  • The risk of cultural imperialism
  • The loss of local culture

15. The government of __________ blocks citizens’ access to popular new media sites like Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter.

  1. China
  2. India
  3. Afghanistan
  4. Australia

15.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Media and Technology

16. A parent secretly monitoring the babysitter through the use of GPS, site blocker, and nanny cam is a good example of:

  1. the social construction of reality
  2. technophilia
  3. a neo-Luddite
  4. panoptic surveillance

17. The use of Facebook to create an online persona by only posting images that match your ideal self exemplifies the_____________ that can occur in forms of new media.

  1. social construction of reality
  2. cyberfeminism
  3. market segmentation
  4. referencing

18. _________ tend to be more pro-technology, while _______ view technology as a symbol of the coldness of modern life.

  1. Luddites; technophiles
  2. technophiles; Luddites
  3. cyberfeminists; technophiles
  4. liberal feminists; conflict theorists

19. When it comes to media and technology, a functionalist would focus on:

  1. the symbols created and reproduced by the media
  2. the association of technology and technological skill with men
  3. the way that various forms of media socialize users
  4. the digital divide between the technological haves and have-nots

20. When all media sources report a simplified version of the environmental impact of hydraulic fracturing, with no effort to convey the hard science and complicated statistical data behind the story, ___________ is probably occurring.

  1. gatekeeping
  2. the digital divide
  3. technophilia
  4. market segmentation

15.5 Collective Behavior

21. Which of the following organizations is not an example of a social movement?

  1. National Football League
  2. Tea Party
  3. Greenpeace
  4. NAACP

22.  Sociologists using a conflict perspective might study what?

  1. How social movements develop
  2. What social purposes a movement serves
  3. What motivates inequitably treated people to join a movement
  4. What individuals hope to gain from taking part in a social movement

23.  Which of the following is an example of collective behavior?

  1. A soldier questioning orders
  2. A group of people interested in hearing an author speak
  3. A class going on a field trip
  4. Going shopping with a friend

24. The protesters at the Egypt uprising rally were:

  1. a casual crowd
  2. a conventional crowd
  3. a mass
  4. an acting crowd

25. According to emergent-norm theory, crowds are:

  1. irrational and impulsive
  2. often misinterpreted and misdirected
  3. able to develop their own definition of the situation
  4. prone to criminal behavior

26.  A boy throwing rocks during a demonstration might be an example of ___________.

  1. structural conduciveness
  2. structural strain
  3. precipitating factors
  4. mobilization for action

15.6 Social Movements

27If we divide social movements according to their positions among all social movements in a society, we are using the __________ theory to understand social movements.

  1. framing
  2. new social movement
  3. resource mobilization
  4. value-added

28While PETA is a social movement organization, taken together, the animal rights social movement organizations PETA, ALF, and Greenpeace are a __________.

  1. social movement industry
  2. social movement sector
  3. social movement party
  4. social industry

29. Social movements are:

  1. disruptive and chaotic challenges to the government
  2. ineffective mass movements
  3. the collective action of individuals working together in an attempt to establish new norms beliefs, or values
  4. the singular activities of a collection of groups working to challenge the status quo

30When the League of Women Voters successfully achieved its goal of women being allowed to vote, they had to undergo frame __________, a means of completely changing their goals to ensure continuing relevance.

  1. extension
  2. amplification
  3. bridging
  4. transformation

31. If a movement claims that the best way to reverse climate change is to reduce carbon emissions by outlawing privately owned cars, “outlawing cars” is the ________.

  1. prognostic framing
  2. diagnostic framing
  3. motivational framing
  4. frame transformation

15.7 Social Change

32. Children in peripheral nations have little to no daily access to computers and the internet, while children in core nations are constantly exposed to this technology. This is an example of:

  1. the digital divide
  2. human ecology
  3. modernization theory
  4. dependency theory

33. When sociologists think about technology as an agent of social change, which of the following is not an example?

  1. Population growth
  2. Medical advances
  3. The internet
  4. Genetically engineered food

34. China is undergoing a shift in the industry, increasing labor specialization and the amount of differentiation present in the social structure. This exemplifies:

  1. human ecology
  2. dependency theory
  3. modernization
  4. conflict perspective

35. Core nations that work to propel peripheral nations toward modernization need to be aware of:

  1. preserving peripheral nation cultural identity
  2. preparing for pitfalls that come with modernization
  3. avoiding hegemonistic assumptions about modernization
  4. all of the above

36. In addition to social movements, social change is also caused by technology, social institutions, population, and ______.

  1. the environment
  2. modernization
  3. social structure
  4. new social movements

Short Answer

15.1 Technology Today

1. Can you think of people in your own life who support or defy the premise that access to technology leads to greater opportunities? How have you noticed technology use and opportunity to be linked, or does your experience contradict this idea?

2.  Should the U.S. government be responsible for providing all citizens with access to the internet? Or is gaining internet access an individual responsibility?

3. How have digital media changed social interactions? Do you believe it has deepened or weakened human connections? Defend your answer.

4.  Conduct sociological research. Google yourself. How much information about you is available to the public? How many and what types of companies offer private information about you for a fee? Compile the data and statistics you find. Write a paragraph or two about the social issues and behaviors you notice.

15.2 Media and Technology in Society

5.  Where and how do you get your news? Do you watch network television? Read the newspaper? Go online? How about your parents or grandparents? Do you think it matters where you seek out information? Why, or why not?

6. Do you believe new media allows for the kind of unifying moments that television and radio programming used to? If so, give an example.

7. Where are you most likely to notice advertisements? What causes them to catch your attention?

15.3 Global Implications of Media and Technology

8. Do you believe that technology has indeed flattened the world in terms of providing opportunity? Why, or why not? Give examples to support your reason.

9.  Where do you get your news? Is it owned by a large conglomerate (you can do a web search and find out!)? Does it matter to you who owns your local news outlets? Why, or why not?

10. Who do you think is most likely to bring innovation and technology (like cell phone businesses) to Sub-Saharan Africa: nonprofit organizations, governments, or businesses? Why?

15.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Media and Technology

11.  Contrast a functionalist viewpoint of digital surveillance with a conflict perspective viewpoint.

12.  In what ways has the internet affected how you view reality? Explain using a symbolic interactionist perspective.

13. Describe how a cyberfeminist might address the fact that powerful female politicians are often demonized in traditional media.

14. The issue of airplane-pilot exhaustion is an issue of growing media concern. Select a theoretical perspective, and describe how it would explain this.

15. Would you characterize yourself as a technophile or a Luddite? Explain, and use examples.

15.5 Collective Behavior

12.  Discuss the differences between a mass and a crowd. What is an example of each? What sets them apart? What do they share in common?

13. Can you think of a time when your behavior in a crowd was dictated by the circumstances? Give an example of an emergent-norm perspective, using your own experience.

14. Discuss the differences between an acting crowd and a collective crowd. Give examples of each.

15. Imagine you are at a rally protesting nuclear energy use. Walk us through the hypothetical rally using the value-added theory, imagining it meets all the stages.

15.6 Social Movements

16. Think about a social movement industry dealing with a cause that is important to you. How do the different social movement organizations of this industry seek to engage you? Which techniques do you respond to? Why?
17. Do you think social media is an important tool in creating social change? Why, or why not? Defend your opinion.
18. Describe a social movement in the decline stage. What is its issue? Why has it reached this stage?

15.7 Social Change

19. Consider one of the major social movements of the twentieth century, from civil rights in the United States to Gandhi’s nonviolent protests in India. How would technology have changed it? Would change have come more quickly or more slowly? Defend your opinion.
20. Discuss the digital divide in the context of modernization. Is there a real concern that poorer communities are lacking in technology? Why, or why not?
21. Which theory do you think better explains the global economy: dependency theory (global inequity is due to the exploitation of peripheral and semi-peripheral nations by core nations) or modernization theory? Remember to justify your answer and provide specific examples.
22. Do you think that modernization is good or bad? Explain, using examples.

Future Research

15.2 Media and Technology in Society

To get a sense of the timeline of technology, check out this website: http://openstax.org/l/Tech_History

To learn more about new media, click here: http://openstax.org/l/new_media

To understand how independent media coverage differs from major corporate-affiliated news outlets, review material from the Democracy Now! website: http://openstax.org/l/2EDemoNow

15.3 Global Implications of Media and Technology

Check out more on the global digital divide here: http://openstax.org/l/Global_Digital_Divide

15.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Media and Technology

To learn more about cyberfeminism, check out the interdisciplinary artist collective, subRosa: http://openstax.org/l/cyberfeminism

To explore the implications of panoptic surveillance, review some surveillance studies at the free, open-source Surveillance and Society site: http://openstax.org/l/Surveillance

Read an example of socialist media from Jacobin magazine here: http://openstax.org/l/2EJacobin

References

15.1 Technology Today

Abbott, Tyler. 2020. “America’s Love Affair With Their Phones.” Reviews.org. (https://www.reviews.org/mobile/cell-phone-addiction/#Smart_Phone_Addiction_Stats)

Allchin, Josie. 2012. “New guidance for brands using child ambassadors.” Marketing Week. (https://www.marketingweek.com/new-guidance-for-brands-using-child-ambassadors/)

American Press Institute. 2015. “Race and ethnicity, device usage, and connectivity.” (https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/publications/reports/survey-research/race-ethnicity-device-usage-connectivity/)

Auxier, Brooke and Rainie, Lee. 2019. “Americans and Privacy.” Pew Research Center. (https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/11/15/americans-and-privacy-concerned-confused-and-feeling-lack-of-control-over-their-personal-information/)

Guillén, M.F., and S.L. Suárez. 2005. “Explaining the Global Digital Divide: Economic, Political and Sociological Drivers of Cross-National Internet Use.” Social Forces 84:681–708.

Hall, J. A., & Baym, N. K. (2012). “Calling and texting (too much): Mobile maintenance expectations, (over) dependence, entrapment, and friendship satisfaction.” New Media and Society, 14, 316–331.

Kooser, Amanda. 2015. “Sleep with your smartphone in hand? You’re not alone.” CNET. (https://www.cnet.com/news/americans-like-to-snooze-with-their-smartphones-says-survey/)

Levy, Sara. 2019. “No, I Won’t Post A Picture of My Kid on Social Media.” Glamour. (https://www.glamour.com/story/mom-wont-post-childs-photo-on-social-media)

Luo, Shanhong. 2014. “Effects of Texting on Satisfaction in Romantic Relationships: The Role of Attachment.” Computers in Human Behavior. April 2014. (10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.014)

Lewis, Dave. 2014. “ICloud Data Breach: Hacking and Celebrity Photos.” Forbes.com. Forbes. Retrieved October 6, 2014 (https://www.forbes.com/sites/davelewis/2014/09/02/icloud-data-breach-hacking-and-nude-celebrity-photos/?sh=735a2af22de7).

Liff, Sondra, and Adrian Shepherd. 2004. “An Evolving Gender Digital Divide.” Oxford Internet Institute, Internet Issue Brief No. 2. Retrieved January 11, 2012 (https://educ.ubc.ca/faculty/bryson/565/genderdigdiv.pdf).

Martin, Michael J. R. 2019. “Rural and Lower Income Counties Lag Nation in Internet Subscription.” (https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/12/rural-and-lower-income-counties-lag-nation-internet-subscription.html)

McChesney, Robert. 1999. Rich Media, Poor Democracy: Communication Politics in Dubious Times. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

Moreno, Johan. 2020. “YouTube Disables Personalized Ads, Comments on Children’s Videos.” Forbes. (https://www.forbes.com/sites/johanmoreno/2020/01/06/youtube-disables-personalized-ads-comments-on-childrens-videos/?sh=202ef7695bf0)

Mossberger, Karen, Caroline Tolbert, and Michele Gilbert. 2006. “Race, Place, and Information Technology.” Urban Affairs Review 41:583–620.

Perrin, Andrew and Turner, Erica. 2019. “Smartphones help blacks, Hispanics bridge some – but not all – digital gaps with whites.” Pew Research Center. (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/08/20/smartphones-help-blacks-hispanics-bridge-some-but-not-all-digital-gaps-with-whites/)

“Planned Obsolescence.” 2009. The Economist, March 23. Retrieved January 12, 2012 (http://www.economist.com/node/13354332).

Population Reference Bureau. 2020. “Children, Coronavirus, and the Digital Divide: Native American, Black, and Hispanic Students at Greater Educational Risk During Pandemic” (https://www.prb.org/coronavirus-digital-divide-education/).

Rainie, Lee, Sara Kiesler, Ruogo Kang, and Mary Madden. 2013. “Anonymity, Privacy, and Security Online.” Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project RSS. Pew Research Center. Retrieved October 5, 2014 (http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/09/05/anonymity-privacy-and-security-online/).

Rappaport, Richard. 2009. “A Short History of the Digital Divide.” Edutopia, October 27. Retrieved January 10, 2012 (http://www.edutopia.org/digital-generation-divide-connectivity).

Sciadas, George. 2003. “Monitoring the Digital Divide … and Beyond.” World Bank Group. Retrieved January 22, 2012 (http://www.infodev.org/en/Publication.20.html).

Smith, Aaron. 2012. “The Best (and Worst) of Mobile Connectivity.” Pew Research Internet Project. Retrieved December 19, 2014 (http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/11/30/the-best-and-worst-of-mobile-connectivity/).

Time.com. 2014. “Rankings.” Fortune. Time.com. Retrieved October 1, 2014 (http://fortune.com/rankings/).

Washington, Jesse. 2011. “For Minorities, New ‘Digital Divide’ Seen.” Pew Internet and American Life Project, January 10. Retrieved January 12, 2012 (http://www.pewinternet.org/Media-Mentions/2011/For-minorities-new-digital-divide-seen.aspx).

15.2 Media and Technology in Society

Anderson, C.A., and B.J. Bushman. 2001. “Effects of Violent Video Games on Aggressive Behavior, Aggressive Cognition, Aggressive Affect, Physiological Arousal, and Prosocial Behavior: A Meta-Analytic Review of the Scientific Literature.” Psychological Science 12:353–359.

Anderson, Craig. 2003. “Violent Video Games: Myths, Facts and Unanswered Questions.” American Psychological Association, October. Retrieved January 13, 2012 (http://www.apa.org/science/about/psa/2003/10/anderson.aspx).

Anderson, Philip, and Michael Tushman. 1990. “Technological Discontinuities and Dominant Designs: A Cyclical Model of Technological Change.” Administrative Science Quarterly 35:604–633.

Dillon, Andrew. 1992. “Reading From Paper Versus Screens: A Critical Review of the Empirical Literature.” Ergonomics 35(10): 1297–1326.

Deng T, Kanthawala S, Meng J, et al. Measuring smartphone usage and task switching with log tracking and self-reports. Mobile Media & Communication. 2019;7(1):3-23. doi:10.1177/2050157918761491

DeSilver, Drew. 2014. “Overall Book Readership Stable, But e-Books Becoming More Popular.” Pew Research Center. Retrieved December 5, 2014 (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2014/01/21/overall-book-readership-stable-but-e-books-becoming-more-popular/).

Duggan, Maeve, and Aaron Smith. “Social Media Update 2013.” Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project RSS. Pew Research Center. Retrieved October 2, 2014 (http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/12/30/social-media-update-2013/).

Federal Communications Commission 2022. FCC Commits another $86M in Emergency Connectivity Funding February 2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022. (https://www.fcc.gov/document/fcc-commits-another-86m-emergency-connectivity-funding).

International Telecommunication Unions. 2014. “The World in 2014: ICT Facts and Figures.” United Nations. Retrieved December 5, 2014 (http://www.itu.int/en/ITU-D/Statistics/Documents/facts/ICTFactsFigures2014-e.pdf).

Jansen, Jim. “Use of the Internet in Higher-income Households.” Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project RSS. Pew Research Center. Retrieved October 1, 2014 (http://www.pewinternet.org/2010/11/24/use-of-the-internet-in-higher-income-households).

Kumar, Ravi. 2014. “Social Media and Social Change: How Young People Are Tapping into Technology.” Youthink! N.p. Retrieved October 3, 2014 (http://blogs.worldbank.org/youthink/social-media-and-social-change-how-young-people-are-tapping-technology).

Lievrouw, Leah A., and Sonia Livingstone, eds. 2006. Handbook of New Media: Social Shaping and Social Consequences. London: SAGE Publications.

McManus, John. 1995. “A Market-Based Model of News Production.” Communication Theory 5:301–338.

Mangen, A., B.R. Walgermo, and K. Bronnick. 2013. “Reading Linear Texts on Paper Versus Computer Screen: Effects on Reading Comprehension.” International Journal of Educational Research 58:61–68.

Nielsen. 2013. “‘Bingeing’ in the New Viewing for Over-the-Top-Streamers.” Retrieved December 5, 2014 (http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2013/binging-is-the-new-viewing-for-over-the-top-streamers.html).

Noyes, Jan, and Kate J. Garland. 2008. “Computer- Vs. Paper-Based Tasks: Are They Equivalent?” Ergonomics 51(9): 1352–1375.

Pew Research Center. 2010. “State of the News Media 2010.” Pew Research Center Publications, March 15. Retrieved January 24, 2012 (http://pewresearch.org/pubs/1523/state-of-the-news-media-2010).

Pew Research Center (2021). Social Media Fact Sheet April 78, 2021. Retrieved May 30, 2022 (https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/).

Pew Research Center’s Project for Excellence in Journalism. 2013. “The State of the News Media 2013.” Pew Research Center Publications. Retrieved December 5, 2014 (http://www.stateofthemedia.org/2013/overview-5/key-findings/).

Prior, Markus. 2005. “News vs. Entertainment: How Increasing Media Choice Widens Gaps in Political Knowledge and Turnout.” American Journal of Political Science 49(3):577–592.

ProCon. 2012. “Video Games.” January 5. Retrieved January 12, 2012 (http://videogames.procon.org/).

Reuters. 2013. “YouTube Stats: Site Has 1 Billion Active Users Each Month.” Huffington Post. Retrieved December 5, 2014 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/21/youtube-stats_n_2922543.html).

Singer, Natasha. 2011. “On Campus, It’s One Big Commercial.” New York Times, September 10. Retrieved February 10, 2012 (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/11/business/at-colleges-the-marketers-are-everywhere.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&ref=education).

Smith, Aaron. 2012. “The Best (and Worst) of Mobile Connectivity.” Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project RSS. Pew Research Center. Retrieved October 3, 2014 (http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/11/30/the-best-and-worst-of-mobile-connectivity/).

Smith, Aaron. 2014a. “African Americans and Technology Use.” Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project RSS. Pew Research Center. Retrieved October 1, 2014 (http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/01/06/african-americans-and-technology-use/).

Smith, Aaron. 2014b. “Older Adults and Technology Use.” Pew Research Centers Internet American Life Project RSS. Pew Research Center. Retrieved October 2, 2014 (http://www.pewinternet.org/2014/04/03/older-adults-and-technology-use/).

United States Patent and Trademark Office. 2012. “General Information Concerning Patents.” Retrieved January 12, 2012 (http://www.uspto.gov/patents/resources/general_info_concerning_patents.jsphttp://www.uspto.gov/patents/resources/general_info_concerning_patents.jsp).

van de Donk, W., B.D. Loader, P.G. Nixon, and D. Rucht, eds. 2004. Cyberprotest: New Media, Citizens, and Social Movements. New York: Routledge.

World Association of Newspapers. 2004. “Newspapers: A Brief History.” Retrieved January 12, 2012 (http://www.wan-press.org/article.php3?id_article=2821).

15.3 Global Implications of Media and Technology

Acker, Jenny C., and Isaac M. Mbiti. 2010. “Mobile Phones and Economic Development in Africa.” Journal of Economic Perspectives 24(3):207–232. Retrieved January 12, 2012 (pubs.aeaweb.org/doi/pdf/10.1257/jep.24.3.207).

Bagdikian, Ben H. 2004. The New Media Monopoly. Boston, MA: Beacon Press Books.

Bristow, Michael. 2011. “Can China Control Social Media Revolution?” BBC News China, November 2. Retrieved January 14, 2012 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-pacific-15383756).

Compaine, B. 2005. “Global Media.” Pp. 97-101 in Living in the Information Age: A New Media Reader Belmont: Wadsworth Thomson Learning.

Friedman, Thomas. 2005. The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the Twenty-First Century. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.

ITU News. 2009. “ITU Telecom World 2009: Special Report: Reflecting New Needs and Realities.” November. Retrieved January 14, 2012 (http://www.itu.int/net/itunews/issues/2009/09/26.aspx).

Jan, Mirza. 2009. “Globalization of Media: Key Issues and Dimensions.” European Journal of Scientific Research 29:66–75.

Katine Chronicles Blog. 2010. “Are Mobile Phones Africa’s Silver Bullet?” The Guardian, January 14. Retrieved January 12, 2012 (http://www.guardian.co.uk/katine/katine-chronicles-blog?page=6).

Ma, Damien. 2011. “2011: When Chinese Social Media Found Its Legs.” The Atlantic, December 18. Retrieved January 15, 2012 (http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/12/2011-when-chinese-social-media-found-its-legs/250083/).

McLuhan, Marshall. 1964. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Pierson, David. 2012. “Number of Web Users in China Hits 513 Million.” Los Angeles Times, January 16. Retrieved January 16, 2012 (http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2012/01/chinese-web-users-grow-to-513-million.html).

The World Bank. 2008. “Global Economic Prospects 2008: Technology Diffusion in the Developing World.” World Bank. Retrieved January 24, 2012 (http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGEP2008/Resources/GEP_ove_001-016.pdf).

15.4 Theoretical Perspectives on Media and Technology

Brasted, Monica. 2010. “Care Bears vs. Transformers: Gender Stereotypes in Advertisements.” Retrieved January 10, 2012 (http://www.sociology.org/media-studies/care-bears-vs-transformers-gender-stereotypes-in-advertisements).

Carmi, Evan, Matthew Ericson, David Nolen, Kevin Quealy, Michael Strickland, Jeremy White, and Derek Willis. 2012. “The 2012 Money Race: Compare the Candidates.” New York Times. Retrieved January 15, 2012 (http://elections.nytimes.com/2012/campaign-finance).

Foucault, Michel. 1975. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage Books.

Fox, Jesse, and Jeremy Bailenson. 2009. “Virtual Virgins and Vamps: The Effects of Exposure to Female Characters’ Sexualized Appearance and Gaze in an Immersive Virtual Environment.” Sex Roles 61:147–157.

Gamson, William, David Croteau, William Hoynes, and Theodore Sasson. 1992. “Media Images and the Social Construction of Reality.” Annual Review of Sociology 18:373–393.

Gentile, Douglas, Lindsay Mathieson, and Nikki Crick. 2011. “Media Violence Associations with the Form and Function of Aggression among Elementary School Children.” Social Development 20:213–232.

Kautiainen, S., L. Koivusilta, T. Lintonen, S. M. Virtanen, and A. Rimpelä. 2005. “Use of Information and Communication Technology and Prevalence of Overweight and Obesity Among Adolescents.” International Journal of Obesity 29:925–933

Krahe, Barbara, Ingrid Moller, L. Huesmann, Lucyna Kirwil, Julianec Felber, and Anja Berger. 2011. “Desensitization to Media Violence: Links With Habitual Media Violence Exposure, Aggressive Cognitions, and Aggressive Behavior.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 100:630–646.

Lazerfeld, Paul F. and Robert K. Merton. 1948. “Mass Communication, Popular Taste, and Organized Social Action.” The Communication of Ideas. New York: Harper & Bros.

Magnet, Shoshana. 2007. “Feminist Sexualities, Race, and The Internet: An Investigation of suicidegirls.com.” New Media & Society 9:577-602.

Mills, C. Wright. 2000 [1956]. The Power Elite. New York: Oxford University Press.

NielsenWire. 2011. “Nielsen Estimates Number of U.S. Television Homes to be 114.7 Million.” May 3. Retrieved January 15, 2012 (http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/media_entertainment/nielsen-estimates-number-of-u-s-television-homes-to-be-114-7-million/).

Pierce, Tess. 2011. “Singing at the Digital Well: Blogs as Cyberfeminist Sites of Resistance.” Feminist Formations 23:196–209.

Savage, Joanne. 2003. “Does Viewing Violent Media Really Cause Criminal Violence? A Methodological Review.” Aggression and Violent Behavior 10:99–128.

Shoemaker, Pamela and Tim Vos. 2009. “Media Gatekeeping.” Pp. 75–89 in An Integrated Approach to Communication Theory and Research, 2nd ed., edited by D. Stacks and M. Salwen. New York: Routledge.

U.S. Department of Commerce. 2011. “Women in STEM: A Gender Gap to Innovation.” August. Retrieved February 22, 2012 (http://www.esa.doc.gov/sites/default/files/reports/documents/womeninstemagaptoinnovation8311.pdf/).

Social Movements and Social Change

AFL-CIO. 2014. “Executive Paywatch.” Retrieved December 17, 2014 (http://www.aflcio.org/Corporate-Watch/Paywatch-2014).

Castells, Manuel. 2012. Networks of Outrage and Hope: Social Movements in the Internet Age. Cambridge, UK: Polity.

Davies, James C. 1962. “Toward a Theory of Revolution.” American Sociological Review 27, no. 1. Retrieved December 17, 2014 (http://www.jstor.org/discover/2089714?sid=21104884442891&uid=3739256&uid=3739704&uid=4&uid=2).

Gell, Aaron. 2011. “The Wall Street Protesters: What the Hell Do They Want?” New York Observer. Retrieved December 17, 2014 (http://observer.com/2011/09/the-wall-street-protesters-what-the-hell-do-they-want/).

Le Tellier, Alexandria. 2012. “What Occupy Wall Street Wants.” Los Angeles Times. Retrieved December 17, 2014 (http://articles.latimes.com/2012/sep/17/news/la-ol-occupy-wall-street-anniversary-message-20120917).

NAACP. 2011. “100 Years of History.” Retrieved December 21, 2011 (http://www.naacp.org/pages/naacp-history).

15.5 Collective Behavior

Blumer, Herbert. 1969. “Collective Behavior.” Pp. 67–121 in Principles of Sociology, edited by A.M. Lee. New York: Barnes and Noble.

LeBon, Gustave. 1960 [1895]. The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind. New York: Viking Press.

Lofland, John. 1993. “Collective Behavior: The Elementary Forms.” Pp. 70–75 in Collective Behavior and Social Movements, edited by Russel Curtis and Benigno Aguirre. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

McPhail, Clark. 1991. The Myth of the Madding Crowd. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.

Smelser, Neil J. 1963. Theory of Collective Behavior. New York: Free Press.

Turner, Ralph, and Lewis M. Killian. 1993. Collective Behavior. 4th ed. Englewood Cliffs, N. J., Prentice Hall.

15.6 Social Movements

A&E Television Networks, LLC. 2014. “Civil Rights Movement.” Retrieved December 17, 2014 (http://www.history.com/topics/black-history/civil-rights-movement).

Aberle, David. 1966. The Peyote Religion among the Navaho. Chicago: Aldine.

AP/The Huffington Post. 2014. “Obama: DOMA Unconstitutional, DOJ Should Stop Defending in Court.” The Huffington Post. Retrieved December 17, 2014. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/23/obama-doma-unconstitutional_n_827134.html).

Area Chicago. 2011. “About Area Chicago.” Retrieved December 28, 2011 (http://www.areachicago.org).

Benford, Robert, and David Snow. 2000. “Framing Processes and Social Movements: An Overview and Assessment.” Annual Review of Sociology 26:611–639.

Blumer, Herbert. 1969. “Collective Behavior.” Pp. 67–121 in Principles of Sociology, edited by A.M. Lee. New York: Barnes and Noble.

Buechler, Steven. 2000. Social Movement in Advanced Capitalism: The Political Economy and Social Construction of Social Activism. New York: Oxford University Press.

CNN U.S. 2014. “Same-Sex Marriage in the United States.” Retrieved December 17, 2014 (http://www.cnn.com/interactive/us/map-same-sex-marriage/).

CBS Interactive Inc. 2014. “Anonymous’ Most Memorable Hacks.” Retrieved December 17, 2014 (http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/anonymous-most-memorable-hacks/9/).

Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs. 2011. “Letter from the Attorney General to Congress on Litigation Involving the Defense of Marriage Act.” Retrieved December 17, 2014 (http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/letter-attorney-general-congress-litigation-involving-defense-marriage-act).

Gladwell, Malcolm. 2010. “Small Change: Why the Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted.” The New Yorker, October 4. Retrieved December 23, 2011 (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell?currentPage=all).

Goffman, Erving. 1974. Frame Analysis: An Essay on the Organization of Experience. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Human Rights Campaign. 2011. Retrieved December 28, 2011 (http://www.hrc.org).

McAdam, Doug, and Ronnelle Paulsen. 1993. “Specifying the Relationship between Social Ties and Activism.” American Journal of Sociology 99:640–667.

McCarthy, John D., and Mayer N. Zald. 1977. “Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A Partial Theory.” American Journal of Sociology 82:1212–1241.

National Organization for Marriage. 2014. “About NOM.” Retrieved January 28, 2012 (http://www.nationformarriage.org).

Sauter, Theresa, and Gavin Kendall. 2011. “Parrhesia and Democracy: Truthtelling, WikiLeaks and the Arab Spring.” Social Alternatives 30, no.3: 10–14.

Schmitz, Paul. 2014. “How Change Happens: The Real Story of Mrs. Rosa Parks & the Montgomery Bus Boycott.” Huffington Post. Retrieved December 17, 2014 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-schmitz/how-change-happens-the-re_b_6237544.html).

Slow Food. 2011. “Slow Food International: Good, Clean, and Fair Food.” Retrieved December 28, 2011 (http://www.slowfood.com).

Snow, David, E. Burke Rochford, Jr., Steven Worden, and Robert Benford. 1986. “Frame Alignment Processes, Micromobilization, and Movement Participation.” American Sociological Review 51:464–481.

Snow, David A., and Robert D. Benford 1988. “Ideology, Frame Resonance, and Participant Mobilization.” International Social Movement Research 1:197–217.

Technopedia. 2014. “Anonymous.” Retrieved December 17, 2014 (http://www.techopedia.com/definition/27213/anonymous-hacking).

Texas Secede! 2009. “Texas Secession Facts.” Retrieved December 28, 2011 (http://www.texassecede.com).

Tilly, Charles. 1978. From Mobilization to Revolution. New York: McGraw-Hill College.

Wagenseil, Paul. 2011. “Anonymous ‘hacktivists’ attack Egyptian websites.” NBC News. Retrieved December 17, 2014 (http://www.nbcnews.com/id/41280813/ns/technology_and_science-security/t/anonymous-hacktivists-attack-egyptian-websites/#.VJHmuivF-Sq).

15.7 Social Change

350.org. 2014. “350.org.” Retrieved December 18, 2014 (http://350.org/).

ABC News. 2007. “Parents: Cyber Bullying Led to Teen’s Suicide.” Retrieved December 18, 2014 (http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3882520).

CBS News. 2011. “Record Year for Billion Dollar Disasters.” CBS News, Dec 11. Retrieved December 26, 2011 (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57339130/record-year-for-billion-dollar-disasters).

Center for Biological Diversity. 2014. “The Extinction Crisis.” Retrieved December 18, 2014 (http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/programs/biodiversity/elements_of_biodiversity/extinction_crisis/).

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). n.d. “Technology and Youth: Protecting your Children from Electronic Aggression: Tip Sheet.” Retrieved December 18, 2014 (http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/ea-tipsheet-a.pdf).

Freidman, Thomas. 2005. The World Is Flat: A Brief History of the 21st Century. New York, NY: Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux.

Gao, Huiji, Geoffrey Barbier, and Rebecca Goolsby. 2011. “Harnessing the Crowdsourcing Power of Social Media for Disaster Relief.” IEEE Intelligent Systems. 26, no. 03: 10–14.

Irwin, Patrick. 1975. “An Operational Definition of Societal Modernization.” Economic Development and Cultural Change 23:595–613.

Klein, Naomi. 2008. The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism. New York: Picador.

Kolbert, Elizabeth. 2014. The Sixth Extinction. New York: Henry Holt and Co.

Megan Meier Foundation. 2014a. “Megan Meier Foundation.” Retrieved December 18, 2014 (http://www.meganmeierfoundation.org/).

Megan Meier Foundation. 2014b. “Megan’s Story.” Retrieved December 18, 2014 (http://www.meganmeierfoundation.org/megans-story.html).

Miller, Laura. 2010. “Fresh Hell: What’s Behind the Boom in Dystopian Fiction for Young Readers?” The New Yorker, June 14. Retrieved December 26, 2011 (http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/atlarge/2010/06/14/100614crat_atlarge_miller).

Mullins, Dexter. 2014. “New Orleans to Be Home to Nation’s First All-Charter School District.” Al Jazeera America. Retrieved December 18, 2014 (http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/4/4/new-orleans-charterschoolseducationreformracesegregation.html).

National Conference of State Legislatures 2022. State Medical Cannabis Laws 5/27/2022. Retrieved May 30, 2022. https://www.ncsl.org/research/health/state-medical-marijuana-laws.aspx

Robers, Simone, Jana Kemp, Jennifer, Truman, and Thomas D. Snyder. 2013. Indicators of School Crime and Safety: 2012. National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, and Bureau of Justice Statistics, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice: Washington, DC. Retrieved December 17, 2014 (http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2013/2013036.pdf).

Sullivan, Melissa. 2005. “How New Orleans’ Evacuation Plan Fell Apart.” NPR. Retrieved December 18, 2014 (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4860776).

Wikia. 2014. “List of Environmental Organizations.” Retrieved December 18, 2014 (http://green.wikia.com/wiki/List_of_Environmental_organizations).

Media Attributions

  • 6 © Joseph Gruber/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_560_Image_0001
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_561_Image_0001 © Carlos Martinez/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_565_Image_0001 © shay sowden/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_567_Image_0001 © Meddy Garnet/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_570_Image_0001 © Marit & Toomas Hinnosaar/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_571_Image_0001 © Mathias F. Svendsen/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_573_Image_0001 © Cambodia4kidsorg/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_576_Image_0001 © Kai Hendry/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_579_Image_0001 © Dennis Yang/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_583_Image_0001 © Cliff1066/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_585_Image_0001
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_587_Image_0001 © Mattwi1S0n:/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_589_Image_0001 © Infrogmation/Wikimedia Commons is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_591_Image_0001 © hozinja/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_593_Image_0001 © Tim Pearce/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_594_Image_0001 © Jose Antonio Navas/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_595_Image_0001 © bradleyolin/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_597_Image_0001 © Cambodia4KidsOrg/flickr is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Introduction-to-Sociology-1655759772_Page_599_Image_0001 © OpenStax is licensed under a CC BY (Attribution) license
  • Capture10

License

Icon for the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

Introduction to Sociology Copyright © 2022 by LOUIS: The Louisiana Library Network is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License, except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book