Who cares about digital disconnection? Exploring commodified digital disconnection discourse through a relational lens

Abstract

Digital disconnection has risen as a new and necessary act of care that individuals perform to counter the burdens associated with 24/7 connectivity. Resources to perform such caring tasks, however, are known to be unequally distributed. Leaning on feminist theory and digital disconnection studies, this study explores whether this unequal distribution also extends to the realm of digital disconnection by examining who is portrayed to care about digital disconnection in marketing communication of digital disconnection products and services. Through a critical discourse analysis, we find that digital disconnection is foremost presented as an individualized responsibility, meaning that the particular responsibility to (re-) gain control, focus and productivity, lies with the individual user. This responsible individual is feminized in most communications, except for highly masculinized, entrepreneurial-oriented forms of commodified digital disconnection. Overall, our analysis highlights how stereotypical gendered caring roles and processes of individual responsibilization are reinforced in commodified digital products and services. To breach this vicious circle, we argue that it is crucial to bring awareness to the essentialness of digital disconnection care work to ensure that disconnection opportunities and responsibilities are not dictated by social inequalities generated by neoliberal logics.

Mapping a pluralistic continuum of approaches to digital disconnection

“…Conversely, from the interpretivist end of the continuum, digital disconnection is approached from the perspective of experiences embedded within social, cultural, and political contexts (Syvertsen, 2020). This involves understanding the power dynamics and inequalities entwined in digital disconnection that go beyond the individual level (Kuntsman and Miyake, 2022; Van Bruyssel et al, 2023). From the material (Adams and Jansson, 2023; Bozan and Treré, 2023) to the cultural (Darling-Wolf, 2021; Fast, 2021), these structural dimensions are seen as overlooked from post-positivist perspectives, and thus call for interpretivist lenses to examine their meaning and effects on society.…”

“…Ghita and Thorén, 2021; Lucero, 2018), as well as discourse analysis of digital disconnection public discourses and materials (e.g. Jorge et al, 2022; Portwood-Stacer, 2013; Syvertsen and Enli, 2020; Van Bruyssel et al, 2023). These qualitative methods can develop insights into personal experiences and culturally specific nuances of digital disconnection phenomena.…”

“…Figueiras and Brites, 2022; Gangneux, 2021; Kaun, 2021; Light and Cassidy, 2014; Pennington, 2021; Plaut, 2023; Syvertsen, 2023). In this cluster of digital disconnection research, studies often aim to contextualize, for example, through situating digital disconnection in social, political, and cultural contexts (Matassi, 2022; Van Bruyssel et al, 2023). The in-depth analysis of users’ lived experiences or of public discourse surrounding digital disconnection explicates how it acquires meaning through dialog between individuals, publics, and societal structures.…”