A PROJECT ON THE INTERNETS EFFECT

ON SOCIAL INEQUALITY

NAME : RESHMI DUTTA

BRANCH : BA.LLB

SECTION : A

ROLL NO : 1683065

SEMESTER : 3RD

SUBJECT : EXPLORATIONS IN SOCIAL

INEQUALITIES

KIIT LAW SCHOOL , BHUBANESWAR ,

ODISHA
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

Firstly , I would sincerely like to thank my

Sociology teacher Ms. Priyanka Singh to give me
an oppertunity to work on an interesting topic.

Secondly , Iwould like to thank all my friends who

have helped me to find out a detailed and important
information related to the topic I.e. The Internets
Effect On Social Inequality

THANKING YOU ,

RESHMI DUTTA
 INTRODUCTION

Social inequality occurs when resources in a given society are

distributed unevenly, typically through norms of allocation, that
engender specific patterns along lines of socially defined
categories of persons. It is the differentiation preference of
access of social goods in the society brought about by power,
religion, kinship, prestige, race, ethnicity, gender, age, and class.
The social rights include labor market, the source of income,
health care, and freedom of speech, education, political
representation, and participation. Social inequality linked
to Economic inequality, usually described on the basis of
the unequal distribution of income or wealth, is a frequently
studied type of social inequality. Though the disciplines
of economics and sociology generally use different theoretical
approaches to examine and explain economic inequality, both
fields are actively involved in researching this inequality.
However, social and natural resources other than purely
economic resources are also unevenly distributed in most
societies and may contribute to social status. Norms of
allocation can also affect the distribution
of rights and privileges, social power, access to public
goods such as educationor the judicial system,
adequate housing, transportation, credit and financial
services such as banking and other social goods and services.

Many societies worldwide claim to be meritocracies—ithat is,

that their societies exclusively distribute resources on the basis
of merit. The term "meritocracy" was coined by Michael
Young in his 1958 dystopian essay "The Rise of the
Meritocracy" to demonstrate the social dysfunctions that he
anticipated arising in societies where the elites believe that they
are successful entirely on the basis of merit, so the adoption of
this term into English sans negative connotations is ironic;
young was concerned that the Tripartite System of education
being practiced in the United Kingdom at the time he wrote the
essay considered merit to be "intelligence-plus-effort, its
possessors ... identified at an early age and selected for
appropriate intensive education" and that the "obsession with
quantification, test-scoring, and qualifications" it supported
would create an educated middle-class elite at the expense of the
education of the working class, inevitably resulting in injustice
and – eventually – revolution. A modern representation of the
sort of "meritocracy" Young feared may be seen in the
series 3%.

Although merit matters to some degree in many societies,

research shows that the distribution of resources in societies
often follows hierarchical social categorizations of persons to a
degree too significant to warrant calling these societies
"meritocratic", since even exceptional intelligence, talent, or
other forms of merit may not be compensatory for the social
disadvantages people face. In many cases, social inequality is
linked to racial inequality, ethnic inequality, and gender
inequality, as well as other social statuses and these forms can
be related to corruption.

The most common metric for comparing social inequality in

different nations is the Gini coefficient, which measures the
concentration of wealth and income in a nation from 0 (evenly
distributed wealth and income) to 1 (one person has all wealth
and income). Two nations may have identical Gini coefficients
but dramatically different economic (output) and/or quality of
life, so the Gini coefficient must be contextualized for
meaningful comparisons to be made.
FROM WIKIPEDIA
INTERNETS EFFECT ON SOCIAL
INEQUALITY

Internet use increases social inequalities, LSE study

shows

Internet use is driving a greater wedge in our

communities, increasing existing inequalities between rich and
poor, a new study reveals.

The study, by Dr Ellen Helsper from the London School of

Economics and Political Science (LSE) and Dutch
researcher Dr Alexander van Deursen, shows that educated
people on high incomes derive the greatest benefits from using
the internet.

This is borne out by their ability to get better deals online,

including products and holidays, use the internet more
successfully to expand their social life and find romantic
partners, and also become more informed politically and in
general.

In contrast, low-income people from socially deprived

backgrounds do not receive the same benefits, regardless of
access and internet skills.
Dr Ellen Helsper says that gender doesn’t influence who
benefits most online, but occupation does.

The study of more than 1100 people was conducted in The

Netherlands, a country with a well-developed digital
infrastructure and near-universal access.

Its findings have been published in the Communication and

Information Technologies Annual and form part of an LSE
project on digital inclusion.

The researchers looked at different socio-economic groups and

how their use of the internet impacted on their economic and
social wellbeing, as well educational, political and institutional
outcomes.

Overall, 75 per cent of those surveyed said the internet enabled

them to buy cheaper products, 68 per cent said they traded
goods via the internet and 62 per cent used it to book more
affordable holidays. The benefits were weighted in favour of
those with a higher social status.

Disabled people, along with retired and unemployed individuals

and care givers, receive the fewest benefits overall by being
online.

Men, particularly those aged 16-35, are more likely to find

partners through online dating than women, the study showed,
and people in urban areas also benefited more than those living
in rural locations.

“To some extent, the findings suggest that access to and use of
the internet might exacerbate existing inequalities offline. Not
everyone is able to translate internet use into tangible everyday
benefits,” Dr Helsper says.
“While more and more people might be online these days, the
internet clearly benefits those with a higher social status,” she
adds.

Notes for editors

The full paper, “The Third-Level Digital Divide: who benefits

most from being online” is available here. The study was
funded by the University of Twente.

To interview Dr Helsper, please contact her

at: E.J.Helsper@lse.ac.uk . For any other queries, please
contact Candy Gibson, LSE Press Office: +44 207 955 7440
or c.gibson@lse.ac.uk

2 February 2016

BY THE LONDON SCHOOL OF

ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCE
 CONCLUSION

Social inequality is found in almost every society. Social

inequality is shaped by a range of structural factors, such as
geographical location or citizenship status, and are often
underpinned by cultural discourses and identities defining, for
example, whether the poor are 'deserving' or 'undeserving'. In
simple societies, those that have few social roles and statuses
occupied by its members, social inequality may be very low.

In tribal societies, for example, a tribal head or chieftain may

hold some privileges, use some tools, or wear marks of office to
which others do not have access, but the daily life of the
chieftain is very much like the daily life of any other tribal
member. Anthropologists identify such highly egalitarian
cultures as "kinship-oriented", which appear to value social
harmony more than wealth or status. These cultures are
contrasted with materially oriented cultures in which status and
wealth are prized and competition and conflict are common.

Kinship-oriented cultures may actively work to prevent social

hierarchies from developing because they believe that could lead
to conflict and instability. In today's world, most of our
population lives in more complex than simple societies.
As social complexity increases, inequality tends to increase
along with a widening gap between the poorest and the most
wealthy members of society.

Social inequality can be classified into egalitarian societies,

ranked society, and stratified society.
 Egalitarian societies are those communities advocating for
social equality through equal opportunities and rights hence no
discrimination. People with special skills were not viewed as
superior compared to the rest. The leaders do not have the power
they only have influence. The norms and the beliefs the
egalitarian society holds are for sharing equally and equal
participation.

Simply there are no classes. Ranked society mostly is

agricultural communities who hierarchically grouped from the
chief who is viewed to have a status in the society. In this
society, people are clustered regarding status and prestige and
not by access to power and resources. The chief is the most
influential person followed by his family and relative, and those
further related to him are less ranked.

Stratified society is societies which horizontally ranked into the

upper class, middle class, and lower class. The classification is
regarding wealth, power, and prestige. The upper class are
mostly the leaders and are the most influential in the society. It's
possible for a person in the society to move from one stratum to
the other. The social status is also hereditable from one
generation to the next.

The major examples of social inequality include income gap,

gender inequality, health care, and social class. The pay
differential for white people their earnings are higher compared
to the blacks. In health care, some individuals receive better and
more professional care compared to others. They are also
expected to pay more for these services. Social class differential
comes evident during the public gathering where upper-class
people given the best places to seat, the hospitality they receive
and the first priorities they receive.

The social inequalities of Internet access, its use, and the

impact on children’s academic performance: Evidence from
a longitudinal study in Switzerland
Anne-Linda Camerini, Peter J Schulz, Anne-Marie Jeannet
First Published August 22, 2017 Research
Article

This longitudinal study explores differences in Internet access

and use among school-aged children in Italian-speaking
Switzerland and whether and how these differences contribute to
inequalities in academic performance. Applying multilevel
structural equation modeling with two-wave original survey data
from 843 students, their parents, as well as students’ end-term
school grades, we show that a family’s socio-economic status
indirectly affects children’s school grades as lower parental
income leads children to use the Internet more frequently for
entertainment and online communication purposes. This form of
Internet use also increases as children have more personal
digital media devices. As children’s increased use of the Internet
for entertainment and online communication worsens their
academic performance, our results suggest that social
inequalities due to children’s socio-economic status are
reinforced by a second-order digital divide. We discuss potential
reasons for our findings as well as their implications and
recommendations for possible interventions.
 BIBLIOGRAPHY
These are the internet sites which have really helped me to gain
information relavant to the topic :

1. WWW.GOOGLE.COM

2. WWW.WIKIPEDIA.COM

3. WWW.SPARKNOTES.COM