Transformation of communication technologies in a digital society: good or evil?
https://doi.org/10.22394/1726-1139-2022-10-54-64
Abstract
This article examines the process of transformation of communication technologies under the influence of digitalization, which today has formed the meaning of the existence of society itself, making it a digital society. The authors meaningfully separate the concepts of “information society” and “digital society”, while demonstrating how they affect the channels, forms and methods of communication between individuals and social institutions. The paper provides a detailed analysis of modern communication technologies and reveals their nature. Considering this aspect through the prism of ethical evaluation: good or evil, allows you to expand research boundaries and show all the components of the communication process in modern conditions. The methodological basis of the work is the analysis of existing communication practices in the conditions of digital reality. On the basis of the analysis, positive and negative factors that influenced the transformation of communication technologies in modern society are identifed by the example of public authorities. The transformation of communication technologies can lead to the transformation of the state itself and the channels of its implementation of power relations, this conclusion is made in the article based on the consideration of political management systems at different stages of their development.
About the Authors
I. A. Vetrenko
Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (North-West Institute of Management, Branch of RANEPA)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Inna A. Vetrenko, Doctor of Science (Political Sciences), Professor
Saint Petersburg
S. A. Shtrikov
Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration (North-West Institute of Management, Branch of RANEPA)
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Sergey A. Shtrikov, Applicant
Saint Petersburg
References
1. Bykov I. A. Network political communication in the conditions of transformation of society:Doctoral Dissertation. St. Petersburg, 2016 [Electronic source]. URL: http://jf.spbu.ru/upload/fles/fle_1460022404_4158.pdf (accessed: 20.05.2022) (in Rus).
2. Evgenieva T. V., Usmanova Z. R. Features of the influence of digital communications on professional culture and adaptation of students of socio-political specialties // Humanities. Bulletinn of the Financial University [Gumanitarnye nauki. Vestnik Finansovogo universiteta]. 2018. N 6. P. 12–18 (in Rus).
3. Ershova G. G. Anthroposystem: communicative models and regulated integration // Historical Journal: scientifc research [Istoricheskiĭ zhurnal: nauchnye issledovaniya]. 2012. N 4. P. 11–25 (in Rus).
4. Castels M. The power of communication. M. : Publishing House of the HSE, 2016. 564 p. (in Rus).
5. Matveev A. S. The communicative nature of social management // Philosophy and Culture [Filosofya i kul’tura]. 2013. N 5. P. 643–649 (in Rus).
6. Filatova O. G., Shabanova E. S. Public communications of state authorities of the Russian Federation in the Web 2.0 space: analysis of blogs and social networks // The Internet and modern society. Proceedings of the XIV All-Russian Joint Conference. St. Petersburg, 2011. P. 220–224 (in Rus).
7. Digitalization of society and the social credit system: problems, prospects : monograph / scientifc ed. by I. A. Vetrenko. SPb. : NWIM of RANEPA, 2022. 352 p. (in Rus).
8. Chernyshev A. I. The need for the use of modern electronic communications by public authorities in Russia // Sociodynamics. 2014. N 8. P. 132–138 (in Rus).
9. What is the digital economy? Trends, competencies, measurement: report to the XX Apr. international Scientifc Conference on problems of Economic and Social development, Moscow, 9–12 Apr. 2019 / G. I. Abdrakhmanova, K. O. Vishnevsky, L. M. Gokhberg et al; scientifc ed. L. M. Gokhberg; Higher School of Economics. M. : Publishing House of the Higher School of Economics, 2019. 210 p. (in Rus).
10. Shtrikov S. A. Managerial design of communication policy of public authorities of the subjects of the Russian Federation in the conditions of approval of the information society // Administrative consulting [Upravlencheskoe konsul’tirovanie]. 2019. N 11 (131). Р. 57–69 (in Rus).
11. Bell D. The Coming of the Post-Industrial Society. The Educational Forum. 1976. N 40 (4). 580 р.
12. Gillespie T. Wired Shut: Copyright and the Shape of Digital Culture. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2007.
13. Drahos P., Braithwaite J. Information feudalism: who owns the knowledge economy? NY : New Press, 2002.
14. Castells M., Cardoso G. The Network Society: From Knowledge to Policy. Washington DC : Center for Transatlantic Relations, 2006. 310 p.
15. Crozier M. Recursive Governance: Contemporary Political Communication and Public Policy, Political Communication. 2007. N 24 (1). P. 1–18.
16. Martin W. The global information society. Aldershot : Gower, 1995.
17. Monge P., Contractor N. S. Theories of communication networks. Oxford : Oxford University Press, 2003. 160 р.
18. Porat M. U. Global Implications of an Information Society. Journal of Communication. 1978. N 28 (1). P. 70–80.
19. Raboy M., Landry N., Shtern J. Digital Solidarities, Communication Policy and Multi-Stakeholder Global Governance. 2010. NY : Peter Lang. 200 p.
20. Sivarajah U., Weerakkody V., Waller P., Lee H. at al. The role of e-participation and open data in evidence-based policy decision making in local government // Journal of Organizational Computing and Electronic Commerce. 2016. N 26 (1–2). P. 64–79.
Review
For citations:
Vetrenko I.A., Shtrikov S.A. Transformation of communication technologies in a digital society: good or evil? Administrative Consulting. 2022;(10):54-64. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.22394/1726-1139-2022-10-54-64
Views:
606
Email this article 