Distinctions in the media welfare state: audience fragmentation in post-egalitarian Sweden

Abstract

This study draws on Pierre Bourdieu’s sociology of culture in order to shed new light on the ongoing fragmentation of media audiences and users. We use a multiple correspondence analysis on national survey data (n = 1604) collected in Sweden in 2015–2016 to (1) create a statistical representation of the contemporary Swedish class structure and proceed to (2) analyze the distribution of a broad range of media practices and media preferences in that space. Results show that social groups reproduce their social status by monopolizing distinct media repertoires. We are able to show that class matters for how people orient themselves in an increasingly high-choice media environment – even in a so-called media welfare state. Following the results of our media-sociological approach, we introduce the concept of audience islands which promotes a non-media-centric understanding of the fragmentation of society and media audiences.

News repertoires and information behavior in Austria—What is the role of social inequality?

“…In a nutshell, the main hypothesis will deal with social positions as an indicator of social inequality. In accordance with the literature (Kalogeropoulos and Nieslen 2018;Lindell and Hovden 2018;Schmuck et al 2016;Tichenor et al 1970), it is expected that those with a higher income, education, stronger workforce integration and perceived higher social status are more likely to use a broader range of media to inform themselves. H1a: Individuals with higher social positions are more likely to use hybrid repertoires.…”

“…Thus, platforms, such as Facebook or Instagram, and messaging applications, such as WhatsApp or Signal, attract a lot of attention regarding information behavior and media consumption. Social media are currently an integral part of the so-called 'high choice media environments' that force consumers to divide their limited amount of time between a manifold of news offerings (Eisenegger 2019;Gil de Zúñiga et al 2017;Lindell and Hovden 2018;Nielsen and Ganter 2018;Song et al 2019).…”

“…Studies consistently identify formal education and income as predictors for broad information repertoires. The less educated or financially worse off are at a higher risk of being less informed about society as they maintain smaller news repertoires (Lindell and Hovden 2018;Schmuck et al 2016). Those arguments are tied to the fact that educational achievements coincide with a broader interest in society and information.…”

Swedish teenagers’ difficulties and abilities to determine digital news credibility

“…Further, our findings indicate that there is, possibly, a gap between news-seekers and news-avoiders (Strömbäck et al, 2013). If this is the case, there might be a link between news habits and skills at determining credibility, which may be associated with socio-cultural patterns, separating young people in society (Lindell & Hovden, 2018). At present, we do not know in any detail what characterizes individuals who rate credibility importance highly.…”

The Media Welfare State: Why such a concept, what is it used for, does it have a future?

“…One crucial dimension concerns class differences and whether the initial analysis glossed over this aspect. Lindell and Hovden (2018) analyse inequalities between media use in Sweden and argue that the metaphor of "social glue" should be replaced with that of distinct "audience islands" whose populations continuously draw boundaries between each other -not least via their distinct media repertoires (see also the extensive analysis in Moe et al, 2019).…”