In recent decades, the world has transitioned from an “industrial society” to an “information society,” defined by highly developed information and telecommunications technology and extensive usage by people, businesses, and government agencies. New social frameworks, such as the information society, have placed information and knowledge at the center of social and economic progress. It considers both the individual’s requirements and those of the social group to which the person belongs. These elements all contribute to the significance of variety.
Why Diversity in Media Matters | Cindy Suryadi | TEDxYouth@WAB
There is rising fear that fast technological advancements are leaving some communities behind. The information technology revolution that started to sweep the country in the early 1980s stalled in the late 1980s but gathered steam again in the early 1990s, catching the public’s and politicians’ interest. During this period, the nature of technology altered drastically, prompting Krieg (1995) to refer to the influence of new technologies as the “next cycle.” Similarly, one may claim that the Internet unites individuals in an immediate worldwide shared communications environment (Hough, 1996). In contrast to mailing a letter in the United States, which takes days, and sending an email globally, sending an email takes seconds, and speaking online through instant messaging takes even less time, hence reducing the distance between individuals (Stromer-Galley, 2003). This enables individuals from a variety of geographic places to meet online, including rural, suburban, and metropolitan areas in North America, Africa, and Asia. In the digital realm, individuals may find themselves in various locations, with diverse cultural, racial, and religious origins, as well as varying levels of education, money, and ideologies. Due to the possibility of visitor heterogeneity, public areas in these networks might be described as “public.” As a consequence, many kinds of communication make it simpler than ever for individuals from diverse backgrounds to communicate (Stromer-Galley, 2003)
Diversity in media ownership
Diversity is essential because it brings a broader variety of viewpoints, needs, beliefs, and perspectives, which promotes more perspectives on issues and may result in better, more equal solutions (Price et al., 2002). From the perspective of diversity, the Internet may provide a number of public forums for such meaningful discussion. Nonetheless, if the notion of homogeneity is accurate, people opt to communicate with like-minded individuals despite the public space the Internet may give; as a result, viewpoints and problem-solving might be constrained (Anderson, 2005).
Diversity in the media is significant because it attracts attention to other marginalized populations and offers a voice to the voiceless. By failing to portray society’s diversity and by enabling a distortion of the “other,” the media contribute to the social distance that already exists between different groups. When specific minorities or disadvantaged groups are depicted favorably in the media, stereotypes may be overcome, which is especially crucial for younger generations who are more directly exposed (Kolozaridi and Dovbysh, 2020). In the digital era, physical boundaries are less significant than words. In this regard, the people have a substantial edge over those in nations where the language is not as prevalent. For instance, YouTube is the most popular website in Spain, particularly for material in Spanish or dubbed into Spanish that is not from Spain but from other Spanish-speaking areas (Dworak et al., 2014). On the other side, there is a new danger of inequality: those with limited or no access to digital systems risk being excluded from work processes and meetings. To combat this in terms of the availability of end devices and the related infrastructure, the same technical standards must be established (Stromer-Galley, 2003).
Financial and other incentives are used by business promoters to recruit enterprises to their areas. However, the emphasis is now on individuals. Human capital – or talent, as we like to call it – is the key to success in this new age of economic expansion. Their ideas and creativity are the most essential determinants of a company’s or region’s economic success (Kolozaridi and Dovbysh, 2020). A new talent pool was created as a result of digitalization to provide a more diversified work environment. Those unable to work owing to a handicap, for instance, may return to work with the use of digital support devices. Moreover, conference and video systems offer the infrastructure for digital meetings that may be hosted anywhere in the globe in real-time (Anderson, 2005). It is possible to hold meetings more efficiently, so enhancing the influence of fresh viewpoints and ideas.
The use of the diversity principle in conventional communication politics has been likened to the application of the diversity concept in internet governance. The diversity principle has a long and well-studied history as a governing policy idea in the conventional media arena, and it is now a major guiding principle of internet governance. When expanding audience exposure to different sources and content is the ultimate objective of any diversity-enhancing strategy (Helberger, 2011), this problem becomes especially pertinent from a policy standpoint. The unknown is whether and how policymakers will concentrate on growing audience consumption from a range of sources, consistent with the logic underpinning the efficient operation of a robust market of ideas (Hoffman et al., 1997). Diversity is at the core of modern communications policy challenges, ranging from media consolidation to privatization and commercialization of media ownership to minority ownership of media channels, content control and program requirements, and most recently the Internet. Guide. In recent years, there has been a substantial increase in all types of diversity research, not just in science but also in policy formulation.
Diversity is crucial for innovation. If the issue is seen in a one-sided and familiar manner, a new solution is often not anticipated. By questioning old assumptions, examining challenges from a variety of angles, and fusing divergent ideas into a unified answer, one may create new things (Cevis, 2022). Without variety, it is impossible to innovate. Today, we also like using the technical opportunities that digitalization provides. For instance, by using robots and the capabilities of artificial intelligence (Dworak et al., 2014). The workplace is becoming more digital. To attain more variety via digitalization, however, it is important to create new systems and improve old ones. Otherwise, artificial intelligence may have a restricted perspective on the planet and its inhabitants. For instance, “algorithmic bias” is predicated on a lack of diversity in data production, preparation, and processing. The effect is uneven user treatment. Utilized as a part of the application process, an algorithmic bias system may propagate prejudices and base life-altering judgments on them.
In conclusion, cultural variety may be safeguarded, strengthened, and promoted in the online environment, for instance by supporting the production of culturally and linguistically appropriate local material. Everyone must assume responsibility to improve the working environment. Acceptance of variety – ideas, viewpoints, age, and gender – is essential for digital development success. As mentioned above, a lack of diversity may harm the whole society, culture, and even ethical equity. Diversity is also regarded as a method for internet governance when online audiences are exposed to various sources of information. Diversity is crucial to contemporary communications policy concerns, including media consolidation, privatization and commercialization of media ownership, minority ownership of media channels, content control, and program requirements, and most recently the Internet.
Anderson, D. (2005). Global linguistic diversity for the Internet. Communications of the ACM, 48(1), 27-28. https://doi.org/10.1145/1039539.1039562
Cevis, E.D. (2022). Why Diversity Matters in the Digital Economy. (2022). Available at: https://www22.verizon.com/wholesale/contenthub/why_diversity_matters_in_digital_economy.html (accessed 06 Oct 2022).
Dworak, B. J., Lovett, J., & Baumgartner, F. R. (2014). The diversity of Internet media: Utopia or dystopia. Midwest Political Science Association, 1(6), 42-65.
Helberger, N. (2011). Diversity by design. Journal of Information Policy, 1(1), 441-469. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2011
Hoffman, D. L., Novak, T. P., & Venkatesh, A. (1997, November). Diversity on the Internet: The relationship of race to access and usage. In Aspen Institute’s Forum on Diversity and the Media, Queenstown, Maryland
Hough, R. R. (1996). Doomsday, the Internet, diversity and sustainability. Systems Research, 13(3), 287-292. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1735(199609)13:3<287::AID-SRES105>3.0.CO;2-1
How diversity makes teams more innovative. youtube.com. (2017). Retrieved 8 October 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lPtPG2lAmm4.
Karppinen, K. (2006). Media Diversity and the Politics of Criteria. Nordicom Review, 27(2).
Kolozaridi, P., & Dovbysh, O. (2020). Diversity of the Internet in Russia’s regions: Towards an alternative research agenda. In Internet in Russia (pp. 149-169). Springer, Cham
Krieg, R. M. (1995). Information technology and low‐income, inner‐city communities. Journal of Urban Technology, 3(1), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630739508724513
Price, V., Cappella, J. N., & Nir, L. (2002). Does disagreement contribute to more deliberative opinion? Political communication, 19(1), 95-112. https://doi.org/10.1080/105846002317246506
Stromer-Galley, J. (2003). Diversity of political conversation on the Internet: Users’ perspectives. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 8(3), JCMC836. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2003.tb00215.x
Why Diversity in Media Matters. Youtube.com. (2022). Retrieved 8 October 2022, from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6gj9WJgWgE.