COVID-19desigualdad informativa y democracia

  1. Polino, Carmelo 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Oviedo
    info

    Universidad de Oviedo

    Oviedo, España

    ROR https://ror.org/006gksa02

Revista:
Arbor: ciencia, pensamiento y cultura

ISSN: 0210-1963

Año de publicación: 2022

Volumen: 198

Número: 806

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.3989/ARBOR.2022.806004 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openAcceso abierto editor

Otras publicaciones en: Arbor: ciencia, pensamiento y cultura

Resumen

The crisis unleashed by the COVID-19 pandemic magnified social asymmetries. Declining income, greater exposure to unemployment, job instability, increased gender inequalities, collapse of public healthcare, and worse performance in learning and educational equality are some consequences of the increase in global inequality. This contribution defends the idea that inequity also manifested itself as informational inequality. In this context, where the weighing of information became more complex, and epistemic and axiological aspects of risk culture emerged with singular clarity, social identity affected the ability to evaluate technical and political facts. Social groups with less education and income had a more restricted informational diet, with an emphasis on social networks, less knowledge about the virus, ambivalence about the measures to be taken, or difficulties in considering the quality of media and institutional information. In short, they were more exposed to disinformation campaigns, particularly intensified with the rise of social networks in the world of digital capitalism. On an individual level, this asymmetry conspires against the autonomy of people and their condition as citizens. On the collective level, it threatens the scope and quality of scientific-technological culture and democratic governance. It is necessary to discuss the relationship between disinformation and democracy, and to reappraise the role of political participation for governance and of education for autonomy, thought, and the development of a cosmopolitan civic ethic.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Ahmed, Faheem; Ahmed, Na’eem; Pissarides, Christopher y Stiglitz, Joseph (2020). Why inequality could spread Covid-19. The Lancet. Public Health, 5(5), e240.
  • Alvaredo, Facundo; Gasparini, Leonardo (2015). Recent trends in inequality and poverty in developing countries. En Annthony B. Atkinson y François Bourguignon (eds). Handbook of income distribution (pp. 697-805). Elsevier.
  • Archer, Louise; Dawson, Emily; DeWitt, Jennnifer; Seakins, Amy y Wong, Billy (2015). ‘‘Science Capital’’: A Conceptual, Methodological, and Empirical Argument for Extending Bourdieusian Notions of Capital Beyond the Arts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 922-948.
  • Banco Mundial (2021). Informe Annual 2021: De la crisis a la recuperación verde, resiliente e inclusiva. Washington, D.C: Banco Mundial.
  • Bennett, W. Lance; y Livingston, Steven (2018). The disinformation order: Disruptive communication and the decline of democratic institutions. European Journal of Communication, 33(2), 122-139.
  • Brennen, J. Scott; Simon, Felix Marvin; Howard, Philip y Nielsen, Rasmus Kleis (2020). Types, sources, and claims of Covid-19 misinformation. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
  • Bourdieu, Pierre (2007). Sobre la televisión. Barcelona: Anagrama.
  • Bourdieu, Pierre (1997). Razones prácticas. Sobre la teoría de la acción. Barcelona: Anagrama.
  • CaixaBank Research (2020). El impacto económico de la Covid-19 en la desigualdad: this time is different, Dossier, noviembre, CaixaBank.
  • Camps, Victoria (2011). El gobierno de las emociones. Barcelona: Herder.
  • Camps, Victoria (2008). Los valores de la educación, Madrid, Anaya.
  • Casara, Bruno Gabriel Salvador; Suitner, Caterina y Jetten, Jolanda (2022). The impact of economic inequality on conspiracy beliefs. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 98, 104245.
  • CEPAL (2022). Panorama Social de América Latina, 2021. Comisión Económica para América Latina: Santiago.
  • Cortina, Adela (2017). Aporofobia, el rechazo al pobre. Barcelona: Paidós.
  • Cortina, Adela (1997). Ciudadanos del mundo. Hacia una teoría de la ciudadanía. Madrid: Alianza.
  • Cortina, Adela (1986). Ética mínima. Introducción a la filosofía práctica, Madrid: Tecnos.
  • Dahl, Robert (1989). Democracy and its critics. New Haven: Yale University Press.
  • Douglas, Karen M.; Sutton, Robbie M. y Cichocka, Alexandra (2017). The psychology of conspiracy theories. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 26(6), 538-542.
  • Echeverría, Javier (2009). Los riesgos de la globalización. En: José Luis Luján y Javier Echeverría (eds.). Gobernar los riesgos. Ciencia y valores en la sociedad del riesgo (pp. 187-206). Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva.
  • Echeverría, Javier (2003). Tecnociencias de la información y participación ciudadana. Isegoría, 28, 73-92.
  • Echeverría, Javier (1999). Los señores del aire: telépolis y el tercer entorno. Barcelona: Destino.
  • Echeverría, Javier y Almendros, Lola (2020). Tecnopersonas. Cómo las tecnologías nos transforman. Gijón: Ediciones Trea.
  • European Union (2022). A new era for Europe. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
  • Ferrara, Emilio; Cresci, Stefano y Luceri, Luca (2020). Misinformation, manipulation, and abuse on social media in the era of Covid-19. Journal of Computational Social Science, 3, 271-277.
  • Funtowicz, Silvio y Ravetz, Jerome (2000). La ciencia post-normal. Ciencia con la gente. Barcelona: Icaria.
  • Gerosa, Tiziano; Gui, Marco; Hargittai, Ezter y Nguyen, Minh Hao (2021). (Mis)informed during Covid-19: How education level and information and information sources contribute to knowledge gaps. International Journal of Communication, 15, 2196-2217.
  • Giddens, Anthony (1996). Modernidad y autoidentidad. En Josetxo Beriain (comp.). Las consecuencias perversas de la modernidad. Modernidad, contingencia y riesgo (pp. 33-72). Barcelona: Anthropos.
  • Giusti, Serena y Pires, Elisa (eds.) (2021). Democracy and fake news. Information, manipulation and post-truth politics. New York: Routledge.
  • Habermas, Jürgen (1985). Conciencia moral y acción comunicativa. Barcelona: Península.
  • Hopf, Henning; Krief Alain; Mehta Goverdhan y Matlin, Stephen A. (2019) Fake science and the knowledge crisis: ignorance can be fatal. Royal Society Open Science, 6: 190161.
  • Humprecht, Edda (2018). Where ‘fake news’ flourishes: A comparison across four Western democracies. Information, Communication & Society, 22(13), 1973-1988.
  • Innerarity, Daniel (2020). Una teoría de la democracia compleja. Gobernar en el siglo XXI. Barcelona: Galaxia Gutemberg.
  • Islam, M. Saiful; Mostofa Kamal, Abu-Hena; Kabir, Alamgir; Southern, Dorothy L.; Khan, Sazzad Hossain; Hasan, Murshid S. M.; Sarkar, Tonmoy; Sharmin, Shayla; Das, Shiuli; Roy, Tuhin; Harun, M Golam Dostogir; Chughtai, Abrar Ahmad; Homaira, Nusrat y Seale, Holly (2021). Covid-19 vaccine rumors and conspiracy theories: The need for cognitive inoculation against misinformation to improve vaccine adherence. PloS ONE, 16(5), e0251605.
  • Jetten, Jolanda (2020). Inequality. En Jolanda Jetten, Stephen D. Reicher, S. Alexander Haslam y Tegan Cruwys (eds.). Together Apart: The Psychology of Covid-19 (pp. 365-382). London: Sage.
  • Jetten, Jolanda; Peters, Kim; Álvarez, Belén; Casara, Bruno Gabriel Salvador; Dare, Michel; Kirkland, Kelly; Sánchez-Rodríguez, Ángel; Selvanathan, Hema Preya; Sprong, Stephany; Tanjitpiyanond, Porntida; Zhechen, Wang y Mols, Frank (2021). Consequences of Economic Inequality for the Social and Political Vitality of Society: A Social Identity Analysis. Advances in Political Psychology, 42(1), 241-266.
  • Jing, Zeng y Schäfer, Mike S. (2021). Conceptualizing “Dark Platforms”. Covid-19-Related Conspiracy Theories on 8kun and Gab. Digital Journalism, 9(9). 1321-1343.
  • López Cerezo, José Antonio (2017). Comprender y comunicar la ciencia. Madrid: Catarata.
  • López Cerezo, José Antonio y Luján López, José Luis (2000). Ciencia y política del riesgo. Madrid: Alianza.
  • MacNair, Brian. (2018). Fake news. Falsehood, fabrication and fantasy in journalism. London: Routledge.
  • Mahl, Daniela; Schäfer, Mike y Zeng, Jing (2022). Conspiracy theories in online environments: An interdisciplinary literature review and agenda for future research. New Media & Society, 1-21.
  • McIntyre, Lee (2018). Posverdad. Cátedra: Madrid.
  • Miller, Jon D.; Ackerman, Mark S.; Laspra, Belén y Huffaker, Jordan (2021). The acquisition of health and science information in the 21st century. The Information Society, 37(2), 82-98.
  • Mills, C. Wright (2003). La imaginación sociológica. México: Fondo de Cultura Económica.
  • Nielsen, Rarmus Kleis; Fletcher, Richard; Newman, Nic; Brennen, J. Scott y Howard, Philip N. (2020). Navigating the ‘Infodemic’: How people in six countries access and rate news and information about coronavirus. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
  • Newman, Nic; Fletcher, Richard; Schulz, Anne; Andi, Sigme y Nielsen, Rarmus Kleis (2020). Reuters Institute Digital News Report 2020. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.
  • Nussbaum, Martha (2010). Sin fines de lucro. Por qué la democracia necesitas de las Humanidades. Katz Editores: Buenos Aires.
  • OECD (2019). Latin America Economic Outlook 2019. Development in Transition. OECD/ CEPAL/CAF.
  • Olivé, León (2009). Riesgo, ética y participación pública. En: José Luis Luján y Javier Echeverría (eds.). Gobernar los riesgos. Ciencia y valores en la sociedad del riesgo (pp. 289-310). Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva.
  • Ortega Gutierrez, Felix; Humanes, María Luisa; Sánchez Serrano, Consuelo; García Tojar; Luis y Tamarit Rodríguez; Ana María (2006). Periodismo sin información. Tecnos: Madrid.
  • Pérez Tapias, José Antonio (2022). Imprescindible la verdad. Barcelona: Herder.
  • Pew Research Center (2021). The Pandemic Stalls Growth in the Global Middle Class, Pushes Poverty Up Sharply. Disponible en: https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2021/03/18/the-pandemic-stalls-growth-in-the-global-middle-class-pushes-poverty-up-sharply/
  • Polino, Carmelo (2021). Praxeology and social asymmetry. En: Ana Muñoz van den Eynde y Carmelo Polino (Coords.). Pocket Science. The praxeological dimension of scientific culture (pp. 59-69). Madrid: Ciemat.
  • Ramos Torre, Ramón y García Selgas, Fernando José (eds.) (2020). Del riesgo a la incertidumbre. Metanarrativas de una historia actual. Madrid: Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas.
  • Reisdorf, Bianca; Blank, Grant; Bauer, Johannes; Cotten, Sheila; Robertson, Craig y Knittel, Megan (2021). Information-Seeking Patterns and Covid-19 in the United States. Journal of Quantitative Description: Digital Media, 1-38.
  • Roozenbeek Jon; Schneider Claudia R.; Dryhurst, Sarah; Kerr John; Freeman Alexandra L. J.; Recchia, Gabriel; van der Bles, Anne Marthe y van der Linden, Sabden (2020). Susceptibility to misinformation about Covid-19 around the world. Royal Society Open Science, 7, 201199.
  • Salaverría, Ramón; Buslón, Nataly; López-Pan, Fernando; León, Bienvenido; López-Goñi, Ignacio y Erviti, María-Carmen (2020). Desinformación en tiempos de pandemia: tipología de los bulos sobre la Covid-19. El profesional de la información, 29(3), e290315.
  • Salecl, Renata (2010). The Tyranny of choice. London: Profile Books Ltd.
  • Scheufele, Dietram A. y Krause, Nicole M. (2019). Science audiences, misinformation, and fake news. PNAS, 116(16), 7662-7669.
  • Shrader-Frechette, Kristin (1991). Risk and rationality, philosophical foundations for populist reforms. Berkeley: University of California Press.
  • Simon, Felix M. y Camargo, Chico Q. (2021). Autopsy of a metaphor: The origins, use and blind spots of the ‘infodemic’. New Media & Society, 1-22.
  • Singh, Karandeep; Lima Gabriel; Cha, Meeyoung; Cha, Chiyoung; Kulshrestha, July; Ahn Yong-Yeol y Varol, Onur (2022). Misinformation, believability, and vaccine acceptance over 40 countries: Takeaways from the initial phase of the COVID-19 infodemic. PLoS ONE. 17(2): e0263381.
  • Sennett, Richard (2006). El respeto. Sobre la dignidad del hombre en un mundo de desigualdad. Barcelona: Anagrama.
  • Solimano, Andrés (2021). Desigualdad persistente en América Latina: perspectiva histórica y experiencias contemporáneas. Pensamiento Iberoamericano, 11, 119-127.
  • Tichenor, Philip J.; Donohue, George A. y Olien, Clarice N. (1970). Mass media flow and differential growth in knowledge. Public Opinion Quarterly, 34(2), 159-170.
  • Todorov, Tzvetan (2012). Los enemigos íntimos de la democracia. Barcelona: Galaxia Gutenberg.
  • Van Dijck, José (2013). The culture of connectivity. A critical History of social media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Van Dijck, José; Poell, Thomas y De Waal, Martin (2018). The platform society. Public values in a connective world. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Van Dijck, José; de Winkel, Tim y Schäfer, Mirko Tobias (2021). Deplatformization and the governance of the platform ecosystem. New Media & Society, 1-17.
  • Vosoughi, Soroush; Roy, Deb y Aral, Sinan (2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146-1151.
  • Vraga, Emily K. y Bode, Leticia (2020). Defining misinformation and understanding its bounded nature: Using expertise and evidence for describing misinformation. Political Communication, 37(1), 136-144.
  • Wagner. Astrid (2022). Retos filosóficos de las sociedades digitales: esbozo de un enfoque sistémico. Dilemata. Revista Internacional de Éticas Aplicadas, 38, 13-29.
  • Waisbord, Silvio (2018). Truth is what happens to news: on journalism, fake news and post-truth. Journalism Studies, 1-14.
  • Webster, James (2014). The Marketplace of attention. How audiences take shape in a digital age. Cambridge: MIT Press.
  • Welp. Yanina (2020). La democracia y el declive de las élites. Nueva Sociedad, 290: 59-68.
  • Welp. Yanina (2018). Todo lo que necesitas saber sobre las democracias del siglo XXI. Buenos Aires: Paidós.
  • Zafra, Remedios (2022). El bucle invisible. Oviedo: Ediciones Nobel.
  • Zinn, Jens O. (2021). Introduction: towards a sociology of pandemics. Current Sociology, 69(4), 435-452.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet