Literature Review

Changes in the society and development of the modern life are the hot topic today. Information and Communication Technology (ICT) develops every day and society changes in the same direction. Nowadays, the network society is widespread in the sociology field and it brings new changes every day. Post-industrial and information societies pay more attention on the role of networks and how they affect social structures than on increase of the knowledge. Networks became being the important part of our life. The status of being “online” wherever you are, gives huge advancement in communication. Although network society can significantly simplify the task of communicating, it could lead to exclusion of mediating presence and reinforcement of insularity.

I read ten articles for collecting information for this literature review. Every article provided important material and good points about network society. Collected information was focused on the impacts of network society on different spheres such as polity, economy, individualism and communalism. For instance, conflicts as well as their resolutions are a part of the social interactions between individuals and communities. Mediators have accepted overlapping network impact and use it widely in their practice. Network society forces peace builders to reevaluate the inclusion aspects of the conflict resolution theory as interconnected networks lead to wider range of parties involved. Past practices of mediating through the political elite and government of the opposing sides have become obsolete. The interconnection within society and its different spheres and domains leads to the previously unknown parties having an influence in conflicts. Conflict resolution theory tries to incorporate networks inside it to account for the influence of these new parties. “Alliance for Peacebuilding”, “European Peace Liaison’s Office”, “Global Partnership for the Prevention of Armed Conflict” and “West African Network for Peacebuilding” are the examples of overlapping networks merging to form more effective organizations focused on conflict resolution. The property of networks as being “connected” also leads to the status of being “not connected” to a particular network, which excludes influence both ways, on the network and the one caused by it. (Nan.2008)

Public spheres are the cognitive spaces from which people receive information and in which they form their perception of the global community. They are formed as a result of interactions, but the focus is on the interactions between minor societies and communities and information sharing rather than person-to-person interaction discussed earlier. However, with the advancement of globalization, the borders of the public spheres are expanding and blurring in their definition. In contemporary society people have many means of receiving information and freedom to express their opinion. This is the result of several factors. The first one is the development of communication networks which provide the means of accessing information from over the globe, from different perspectives. It helps excluding high level bias from information and forming more founded opinion. The other factor is the relations between governments and influence of NGO (Non governmental organizations) on them. The international scene has widened its borders and now has a notable influence on the governments, in the form of global opinion and NGOs’ political clout. Governments have to consider these factors before taking any actions. The last prominent factor is the increased activity of individuals who are not part of any government or NGO. The active individuals communicate between each other and organize their actions to achieve greater results. All of these factors are structured as networks and use networks as a method of self-distribution. The result of combination of these factors is the appearance of the transnational public spheres which change forms of political and social activity. (Crack.2007)

Culture is one of the factors determining the degree of development in the society and is largely formed by the social environment of individual and community. Culture is formed from the life of the society, its views of the world, and the transfer of those values through generations. The changes in different social structures, that are ongoing, changed perception and values of the modern man and therefore have affected the culture enormously. The phrase ‘digital culture’ is frequently used to describe these changes of modern culture as a result of the development of ICTs. (Dijk.2006) One of these changes is communication, which has been discussed earlier. Communicating became not only more complex, but also easier to access, due to its cheapness and “on the move” feature. For these and other reasons interaction and communication became major aspects of modern culture. Communicating with others individuals and communities has reached the level of necessity making access to ICT a constitutional right, in some countries of European Union. (Muraszkiewicz.2004) One thing that should be mentioned is the effect of radical paranoia to which the developed sociability and globalization has led. The merging of different societies creates pressure upon each individual and fear or paranoia for his unique being. The problem of private space in the global society intensifies in the network society even more so. The connections to the networks and reliance on trust, in the governing, cause individual to constantly fear for their privacy and private space. (Featherstone.2008)

Media serves as the means of communicating information in societies and forming public spheres within society. In the network society, media is predicted to become more interactive. As the variety and amount of media-content increases, so does competition of the media market. To that end, Castells predicts, the distributor which provides the most entertaining and interactive experience will succeed. (Castells and Cardoso.2005) However, the Internet the already allows some freedom of choice. It combines all media-content and allows interactivity by filtering viewing and still could be considered as mass media, since internet connects people all over the globe. However, the current situation is different from traditional mass media. The Internet allows people to distribute self-made media content in the form of blogs, video blogs, streaming and image hosting. These distributors’ networks cooperate to provide content and enhance it without intervention of any media corporations. In this the transition from industrial society is observed, since one of its main characteristics is mass media system. (Dijk.2006) Media influences the formation of the identity of the individuals which in turn can be attributed to the effects on public opinion and political and governing decision-making. Opinion is formed by processing the available information on the issue and considering the facts against moral values. In network society people have access to massives of information on variety of topics. Thus the individual can choose which information to process and issues about which to form opinions. This leads to the large variety of different opinions throughout society and to the risks of social and political conflicts, forcing political structures to adapt themselves for these conditions. (Castells and Cardoso.2005)

Polity is the domain of society influence of which on people is unquestionable and therefore requires analysis for clearer result. Polity defines several principles of community structures and types of interaction between them. One of such communities is the ‘state’, which is defined as “a nation or territory considered as an organized political community under one government” (Oxford Dictionary Online. 28th February 2011). This definition while giving an idea of the state does not describe it completely. Sociologists are still heavily debating definition of the state. The network society offers its own structure of the state and its role in society. Castells argues that present-day society experiences formation of new state structure, effects of which could be observed in the trends of globalization, to which he refers to as ‘emerging global network’. The ‘network state’ is a form of the state that operates not only on national level, but also takes large part in the global governance. Castells argues that there will be no global government, but rather global state networks which will cooperate and integrate some of its services. A prime example of such a state network is the EU. (Castells and Cardoso.2005; Van Dijk.2006; Bang and Esmark.2009) Governance systems based on the concept of networks are growing more popular. Nation-states form unions and organization that govern globally. The United Nations (UN), International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the G-8 control some aspects of polity on the global scale. Bang states that it is natural considering the globalization and formation of the advanced liberal state. However, there is an argument rising that the network governance is undemocratic and can lead to the violation of the basic human and civilian rights. This is partially correct as network governance seeks the most efficient ways of controlling and managing structure, rather than following notions of democracy. Bang labels this property as ‘control society’, albeit the term may sound misleading. The core principle of control society is the trust of a person in the long-term benefits of the government for himself and his goals. The glaring difference of the control society from its predecessor, the discipline society, is the fact that the former relies on and promotes self-control and responsibility for oneself, rather than limiting individual through moral, legal and public means. (Bang and Esmark.2009)

The economy is one of the major aspects of society, especially so in capitalistic-oriented states. It has been the driving force behind the progress of humanity and affects social life and status of individual greatly. The concept of network society as defined by Castells is claimed to have significant effect on modern economics. The economy in network society creates a new form of organizational structure that is, according to Castells, the source of a notable increase in the level of productivity in USA. Analogous results could be traced in Several European states, such as Finland and Ireland. Research conducted by D. Jorgenson shows that states which interact with the global network economy, have a considerable degree of increased productivity. (Castells and Cardoso.2005) Transition to the ‘new’, networked economy could be attributed to the dependency of organizations on and the integration of the internet, telephony, organizational and production networks. Networks in the structure of any organization, supported by ICT, lead to the division of labor, decentralization of production and freedom of developing the product. Creating their own flexible networks allows international companies to lessen their dependence on often inefficient transportation and executive public networks. (Van Dijk.2006) Previous structures of large international companies have been transforming into set of nodes and branches, each with a degree of independency from main quarters. These nodes interact not only within networks of the company but also with smaller local business networks. It allows the company to have more opportunities for innovation, evolution, growth on local markets and worldwide and wider range of suppliers for each step of production. However, this scheme has a disadvantage of possible favoritism of one network over another, because of its geographical location and influence on the local markets. (Hakansson.2006)

Дата добавления: 2015-11-16