Media Researcher: Inequality and lack of media consumption cause division

In his PhD thesis titled "Stratified Publics: A Sociological Study of Inequality in Citizenship, Media, and Public Formation in the Digital Era," sociologist Morten Fischer Sivertsen focuses on what citizens do and say in the public sphere.

The background of the project is the widespread concern, according to the researcher, that has arisen in the digital age about whether the public conversation is being manipulated by opaque algorithms, leading to societal division. However, according to the thesis's analysis, social inequality is a more significant factor than social media, which often takes the blame for the division in society.

"Inequality – such as educational, occupational, and economic differences – helps shape us as individuals, both culturally and politically. Across societal layers, there are significant differences in people's preferences regarding how to act as citizens in a democracy and how to orient themselves through the media," he explains.

According to Morten Fischer Sivertsen, the uneducated worker and, for example, the lawyer see many things differently – from political opinions and areas of interest to a more fundamental trust in our democratic institutions. These differences are also evident in media usage, where the more resourceful individuals are more likely to use established news media, print newspapers, listen to P1 (a Danish radio station), and follow political and intellectual figures online.

"My research shows that social inequality is one of the most important mechanisms – along with age – for understanding Danes' media consumption, both offline and online," he says and continues:

"One might be tempted to think that, broadly speaking, we have two types of citizens: those who engage in democracy and those who do not. But I believe that is incorrect. It is more a matter of there being some dominant categories of what it means to be a good citizen, involving practices that are not equally easy for everyone to perform. These requirements include mastering the right political vocabulary, the right debating style, the right political taste and interest, which are things particularly learned at higher education institutions," he explains.

Downplaying political engagement

According to the researcher, population groups that do not meet these requirements will experience a distance from politics and often see themselves as uninterested in politics. But at the same time, they are often active on social media, where they may be interested in animal welfare and skeptical of the way the Covid-19 pandemic was handled – which Morten Fischer Sivertsen categorizes as political viewpoints.

"In my study, several of these people claim that they are not interested in politics. But that is not correct when you look closer at their behavior. The problem is that we as a society often operate with an idealized image of the good citizen, but we do not consider the question of differences in economic and cultural resources," he explains.

Morten Fischer Sivertsen does not believe that the media creates inequality. It is more a question of welfare policy priorities, changes in the labor market, and larger macroeconomic changes and developments. However, he believes that the media can legitimize inequality in various ways, such as by reproducing it linguistically or by failing to challenge it.

"Journalists have a particular power to frame public conversation, and certain forms of language use can reinforce class hierarchies. One must also admit that most journalists themselves are in privileged positions. And therefore, one can ask the question of whether the media generally have blind spots regarding class issues," he concludes.