Campo, conexión y desigualdad. Hacia una economía política de las prácticas en la era del capitalismo digital

  1. Barba del Horno, Mikel 1
  1. 1 Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea
    info

    Universidad del País Vasco/Euskal Herriko Unibertsitatea

    Lejona, España

    ROR https://ror.org/000xsnr85

Journal:
Teknokultura: Revista de Cultura Digital y Movimientos Sociales

ISSN: 1549-2230

Year of publication: 2020

Issue Title: Capitalismo digital

Volume: 17

Issue: 2

Pages: 121-130

Type: Article

DOI: 10.5209/TEKN.69317 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

More publications in: Teknokultura: Revista de Cultura Digital y Movimientos Sociales

Sustainable development goals

Abstract

Este artigo apresenta uma reflexão sobre o potencial que o referencial teórico desenvolvido por Pierre Bourdieu apresenta para o estudo do digital. Parte de três premissas epistemológicas: a existência de uma certa continuidade estrutural com a sociedade pré-digital, a rejeição do dualismo digital-analógico e uma concepção de poder e desigualdade que vai além do que é puramente conectivo ou informacional. Ao longo do texto, é exposto como a teoria de Bourdieu pode ser uma ferramenta poderosa ao abordar alguns dos debates levantados na sociologia digital: debates em torno da presença de atores não humanos, o conjunto ciborgue digital ou o conceito decfvx. Também é defendida a potencialidade do conceito objetivo de capital cultural para integrar o digital no universo das práticas sociais. Esse conceito acomoda elementos como corpo, espaço, dados ou infraestrutura na explicação da desigualdade.

Bibliographic References

  • Bauman, Z. (2015). Modernidad líquida. Fondo de Cultura Económica.
  • Bennett, T., Savage, M., Silva, E. B., Warde, A., Gayo-Cal, M. y Wright, D. (2008). Culture, Class, Distinction. Taylor & Francis.
  • Besteman, C. y Gusterson, H. (2019). Life by Algorithms: How Roboprocesses Are Remaking Our World. University of Chicago Press.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. En Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (J.G. Richardson, pp. 241-258). New York: Greenwood Press.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1979). Los tres estados del capital cultural. Sociológica, 5, 11-17.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1988). La distinción: criterios y bases sociales del gusto. Madrid: Taurus.
  • Bourdieu, P. (1997). Razones prácticas. Sobre la teoría de la acción. Barcelona: Anagrama.
  • Bourdieu, P. (2005). Una invitación a la sociología reflexiva (1a ed.). Argentina: Siglo XXI Editores.
  • Bourdieu, P. (2007). El sentido práctico. Argentina: Siglo XXI Editores.
  • Bourdieu, P. (2014). Sobre el Estado: cursos en el Collège de France (1989-1992). Barcelona: Anagrama.
  • Calderón Gómez, D. (2020). The third digital divide and Bourdieu: Bidirectional conversion of economic, cultural, and social capital to (and from) digital capital among young people in Madrid. New Media & Society. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820933252
  • Castells, M. (2004). La era de la información: Economía, Sociedad y Cultura. Argentina: Siglo XXI Editores.
  • Chadwick, A. (2017). The Hybrid Media System: Politics and Power. Oxford: University Press.
  • Culpepper, P. D. y Thelen, K. (2019). Are We All Amazon Primed? Consumers and the Politics of Platform Power: Comparative Political Studies. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414019852687
  • Eubanks, V. (2018). Automating Inequality: How High-Tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor. New York: St. Martin’s Publishing Group.
  • Ferguson, N. (2011). Digital Dualism versus Augmented Reality. Cyborgology. Recuperado de https://thesocietypages.org/cyborgology/2011/02/24/digital-dualism-versus-augmented-reality/
  • Fuchs, C. y Dyer-Witheford, N. (2013). Karl Marx @ Internet Studies. New Media y Society, 15(5), 782-796. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812462854
  • Grignon, C. y Passeron, J.C. (1992). Lo culto y lo popular: miserabilismo y populismo en sociología y en literatura. Madrid: Ediciones La Piqueta.
  • Haste, H. (2005). Joined-Up Texting: The role of mobile phones in young people’s lives. London: Nestlé Social Research Programme.
  • Ignatow, G. y Robinson, L. (2017). Pierre Bourdieu: Theorizing the digital. Information, Communication y Society, 20(7), 950-966. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2017.1301519
  • James, C., Davis, K., Charmaraman, L., Konrath, S., Slovak, P., Weinstein, E., y Yarosh, L. (2017). Digital Life and Youth Well-being, Social Connectedness, Empathy, and Narcissism. Pediatrics, 140 (Supplement 2), S71-S75. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-1758F
  • Jamieson, L. (2013). Personal Relationships, Intimacy and the Self in a Mediated and Global Digital Age. En Digital Sociology: Critical Perspectives (K. Orton-Johnson y N. Prior, pp. 13-33). Palgrave Macmillan UK.
  • Jiménez González, A. (2020). Tech power: a critical approach to digital corporations. Teknokultura, 17(1), 77-85. https://doi.org/10.5209/tekn.66931
  • Khan, L. (2018). Sources of Tech Platform Power. Social Science Research Network. Recuperado de https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3558741
  • Lash, S. (2007). Power after Hegemony: Cultural Studies in Mutation? Theory, Culture y Society, 24(3), 55-78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276407075956
  • Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Leukfeldt, E. R., Kleemans, E. R. y Stol, W. P. (2017). Cybercriminal Networks, Social Ties and Online Forums: Social Ties Versus Digital Ties Within Phishing and Malware Networks. The British Journal of Criminology, 57(3), 704-722. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azw009
  • Lupač, P. (2018). Beyond the Digital Divide: Contextualizing the Information Society. Reino Unido: Emerald Group Publishing.
  • Lupton, D. (2014). Digital Sociology. New York: Routledge.
  • Marres, N. (2017). Digital Sociology: The Reinvention of Social Research. Londres: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Morozov, E. (2013). To Save Everything, Click Here: The Folly of Technological Solutionism. London: PublicAffairs.
  • Noble, S. U. (2018). Algorithms of Oppression: How Search Engines Reinforce Racism. New York: NYU Press.
  • Nolan, S., Hendricks, J., Ferguson, S., y Towell, A. (2017). Social networking site (SNS) use by adolescent mothers: Can social support and social capital be enhanced by online social networks? – A structured review of the literature. Midwifery, 48, 24-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2017.03.002
  • OIT. (2019). Las plataformas digitales y el futuro del trabajo: Cómo fomentar el trabajo decente en el mundo digital. Organización Internacional del Trabajo. Recuperado de https://www.ilo.org/global/publications/books/WCMS_684183/lang--es/index.htm
  • Ozer, N. A. (2012). Putting Online Privacy above the Fold: Building a Social Movement and Creating Corporate Change. New York University Review of Law & Social Change, 36, 215.
  • Pace, J. (2018). The Concept of Digital Capitalism. Communication Theory, 28(3), 254-269. https://doi.org/10.1093/ct/qtx009
  • Pariser, E. (2011). The Filter Bubble: How the New Personalized Web Is Changing What We Read and How We Think. New York: Penguin Random House.
  • Pasquale, F. (2015). The Black Box Society. New York: Harvard University Press.
  • Peirano, M. (2019). El enemigo conoce el sistema: Manipulación de ideas, personas e influencias después de la economía de la atención. España_ Penguin Random House
  • Polanyi, K. (1957). El sistema económico como proceso institucionalizado. En Entre las gracias y el molino satánico. Lecturas de Antropología Económica.(P. Moreno, pp. 155-1789. Madrid: UNED Editorial.
  • Portes, A. (1998). Social Capital: Its Origins and Applications in Modern Sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 24(1), 1-24.
  • Putnam, R. D. (1995). Bowling Alone: America’s Declining Social Capital. Journal of Democracy, 6(1), 65-78. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.1995.0002
  • Ragnedda, M. (2018). Conceptualizing Digital Capital. Telematics and Informatics, 35(8), 2366-2375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2018.10.006
  • Rahman, K. S. (2018). Infrastructural Regulation and the New Utilities (SSRN Scholarly Paper ID 3205994). Social Science Research Network. Recuperado de https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3205994
  • Rendueles, C., y Sádaba, I. (2019). Digitalización y cambio social: De las expectativas apocalípticas a la tecnopolítica del presente. Cuadernos de relaciones laborales, 37(2), 331-349. https://doi.org/10.5209/crla.66041
  • Ritzer, G. (2002). Teoría sociológica moderna (5a ed.). New York: MacGraw-Hill.
  • Rosenblat, A. (2018). Uberland: How Algorithms Are Rewriting the Rules of Work. California: Univ of California Press.
  • Savage, M. (2013). Digital Fields, Networks and Capital: Sociology beyond Structures and Fluids. En Digital Sociology: Critical Perspectives (K. Orton-Johnson y N. Prior, pp. 139-147). Reino Unido: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Stanley, J. (2016). How Propaganda Works. Nueva Jersey: Princeton University Press.
  • Ting, D. S. W., Carin, L., Dzau, V. y Wong, T. Y. (2020). Digital technology and COVID-19. Nature Medicine, 26(4), 459-461. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-020-0824-5
  • Tschiatschek, S., Singla, A., Rodriguez, M., Merchant, A. y Krause, A. (2018). Fake News Detection in Social Networks via Crowd Signals. 517-524. https://doi.org/10.1145/3184558.3188722
  • Deursen, A. J. A. M. van y Dijk, J. A. G. M. van. (2015). Toward a Multifaceted Model of Internet Access for Understanding Digital Divides: An Empirical Investigation. The Information Society, 31(5), 379-391. https://doi.org/10.1080/01972243.2015.1069770
  • Wellman, B., Berkowitz, S. D., y Granovetter, M. (1988). Social Structures: A Network Approach. Cambridge: CUP Archive.