This study examines how newspapers socially construct the topics of digital exclusion and inclusion in Flanders (Belgium) against a backdrop of substantial governmental investments in digitalization. Using critical discourse analysis, we examined how Flemish newspaper media (March 2020–March 2023) represented digital exclusion as a social problem, the proposed solutions of digital inclusion, and the actors portrayed as responsible for implementing these solutions. Our findings reveal that newspaper coverage predominantly frames digital inclusion through a neoliberal and techno-solutionist lens, emphasizing a “strong digital society” and attributing responsibility to “digitally unskilled” individuals to adapt. However, we also identified a counter-discourse which focuses on structural inequalities, digital access barriers, and the notion of responsible and sustainable digitalization. We argue that the prevailing neoliberal framing risks reinforcing exclusion rather than fostering inclusivity. Implications for research, policy, and practice are discussed.
AnrijsSDrooghmansNNeerinckxH, et al. (2022) Examining differences in internet use aspects among people with intellectual disabilities in Flanders. Telematics and Informatics69: 101784.
2.
AnrijsSMariënIDe MarezL, et al. (2023) Excluded from essential internet services: examining associations between digital exclusion, socio-economic resources and internet resources. Technology in Society73: 102211.
3.
AnrijsSPonnetKDe MarezL (2020) Development and psychometric properties of the Digital Difficulties Scale (DDS): an instrument to measure who is disadvantaged to fulfill basic needs by experiencing difficulties in using a smartphone or computer. PLOS ONE15(5): e0233891.
4.
AsmarAMariënIVan AudenhoveL (2022) No one-size-fits-all! Eight profiles of digital inequalities for customized inclusion strategies. new media & society24(2): 279–310.
BlombergMAltschwagerDSeoH, et al. (2021) Digital divide and marginalized women during COVID-19: a study of women recently released from prison. Information, Communication & Society24(14): 2113–2132.
7.
boydDAngelM (2024) Techno-legal solutionism: regulating children’s online safety in the United States. In: CSLAW’24: Proceedings of the 2024 symposium on computer science and law, Boston, MA, 12–13 March 2024.
8.
CarenzioAFerrariSRasiP (2021) Older people’s media repertoires, digital competences and media literacies: A case study from Italy. Education Sciences11: MDPI584.
9.
CarvalhoA (2008) Media(ted) discourse and society: rethinking the framework of critical discourse analysis. Journalism Studies9(2): 161–177.
10.
ChaterNLoewensteinG (2023) The i-frame and the s-frame: how focusing on individual-level solutions has led behavioral public policy astray. Behavioral and Brain Sciences46: e147.
11.
ChenWLiX (2022) Digital inequalities in American disadvantaged urban communities: access, skills, and expectations for digital inclusion programs. Information, Communication & Society25: 1916–1933.
12.
De BensERaeymaeckersK (2010) De Pers in België: Het Verhaal Van De Belgische Dagbladpers: Gisteren, Vandaag En Morgen [The Press in Belgium: History of the Belgian Daily Press]. Leuven: Lannoo Campus.
13.
De WolfRJoyeS (2019) Control responsibility: the discursive construction of privacy, teens, and Facebook in Flemish newspapers. International Journal of Communication13: 20.
14.
EubanksV (2018) Automating Inequality: How High-tech Tools Profile, Police, and Punish the Poor. New York: St. Martin’s Publishing Group.
FaureLVendraminPSchurmansD (2020) A situated approach to digital exclusion based on life courses. Internet Policy Review9: 1475.
18.
García-MoraFMora-RiveraJ (2021) Exploring the impacts of Internet access on poverty: a regional analysis of rural Mexico. new media & society25: 26–49.
19.
GlencrossSMasonJKatsikitisM, et al. (2021) Internet use by people with intellectual disability: exploring digital inequality – a systematic review. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. Epub ahead of print 18 March. DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2020.0499
20.
GoedhartNSBroerseJEKattouwR, et al. (2019) ‘Just having a computer doesn’t make sense’: the digital divide from the perspective of mothers with a low socio-economic position. new media & society21(11–12): 2347–2365.
21.
GoedhartNSVerdonkPDeddingC (2022) “Never good enough.” A situated understanding of the impact of digitalization on citizens living in a low socioeconomic position. Policy & Internet14: 824–844.
22.
GreerBRobothamDSimblettS, et al. (2019) Digital exclusion among mental health service users: qualitative investigation. Journal of Medical Internet Research21(1): e11696.
23.
HallS (1992) The West and the rest: discourse and power. In: HallSGiebenB (eds.) Formations of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press, pp. 184–227.
24.
HeitplatzVN (2020) Fostering digital participation for people with intellectual disabilities and their caregivers: towards a guideline for designing education programs. Social Inclusion8(2): 201–212.
25.
HellemansS (2020) “Pillarization (‘Verzuiling’). On organized ‘Self-Contained Worlds’ in the modern world.” The American Sociologist51(2): 124–147.
26.
HelsperEJ (2021) The Digital Disconnect: The Social Causes and Consequences of Digital Inequalities. New York: Sage.
27.
HelsperEJReisdorfB (2017) The emergence of a “digital underclass” in Great Britain and Sweden: changing reasons for digital exclusion. new media & society19(8): 1253–1270.
28.
HeponiemiTGluschkoffKLeemannL, et al. (2021) Digital inequality in Finland: access, skills and attitudes as social impact mediators. new media & society25: 2475–2491.
29.
HeponiemiTJormanainenVLeemannL, et al. (2020) Digital divide in perceived benefits of online health care and social welfare services: national cross-sectional survey study. Journal of Medical Internet Research22(7): e17616.
30.
HolmesHBurgessG (2022) Digital exclusion and poverty in the UK: how structural inequality shapes experiences of getting online. Digital Geography and Society3: 100041.
31.
HumphryJHartmannMMarlerW, et al. (2024) Digital disparities beyond the stably housed: researching global homelessness and mobile media. Mobile Media & Communication12(2): 225–239.
32.
JoyeSMaeseeleP (2022) Critical discourse analysis: the articulation of power and ideology in texts. In: MulcahyLTsalapatanisA (eds) Qualitative Data Analysis: Key Approaches. London: Sage, pp. 17–42.
33.
LeeuwenCvan JacobsAMariënI, et al. (2024) What do the papers say? The role of older adults in 20 years of digital inclusion debate in Dutch and Flemish newspapers. International Journal of Ageing and Later Life17: 2.
LuXYaoYJinY (2022) Digital exclusion and functional dependence in older people: findings from five longitudinal cohort studies. Eclinicalmedicine54: 101708.
36.
MadsenCØLindgrenIMelinU (2022) The accidental caseworker – How digital self-service influences citizens’ administrative burden. Government Information Quarterly39(1): 101653.
37.
MansellR (2012) Imagining the Internet: Communication, Innovation, and Governance. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
38.
MarencoMSeidlT (2021) The discursive construction of digitalization: a comparative analysis of national discourses on the digital future of work. European Political Science Review13: 391–409.
39.
MergelIEdelmannNHaugN (2019) Defining digital transformation: results from expert interviews. Government Information Quarterly36(4): 101385.
40.
MubarakFNycykM (2017) Teaching older people internet skills to minimize grey digital divides: developed and developing countries in focus. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society15(2): 165–178.
41.
MulcahyLTsalapatanisA (2022) Exclusion in the interests of inclusion: who should stay offline in the emerging world of online justice?Journal of Social Welfare and Family Law44: 455–476.
42.
PolsonEBottaRAVan HouwelingE (2023) Where’s the bathroom in this “mobile home”? Adding water, sanitation & hygiene (WaSH) infrastructure to agendas on homelessness and digital media. Mobile Media & Communication12(2): 368–385.
ReisdorfBDeCookJR (2022) Locked up and left out: formerly incarcerated people in the context of digital inclusion. new media & society24(2): 478–495.
45.
ReisdorfBRhinesmithC (2020) Digital inclusion as a core component of social inclusion. Social Inclusion8(2): 132–137.
46.
ReutterL (2022) Constraining context: situating datafication in public administration. new media & society24(4): 903–921.
47.
RosenLDLimAFFeltJ, et al. (2014) Media and technology use predicts ill-being among children, preteens and teenagers independent of the negative health impacts of exercise and eating habits. Computers in Human Behavior35: 364–375.
48.
ScheerderAJvan DeursenAvan DijkJ (2017) Determinants of Internet skills, uses and outcomes. A systematic review of the second- and third-level digital divide. Telematics and Informatics34(8): 1607–1624.
49.
SchiffDSSchiffKJPiersonP (2022) Assessing public value failure in government adoption of artificial intelligence. Public Administration100(3): 653–673.
50.
SchouJHjelholtM (2018) Digital citizenship and neoliberalization: governing digital citizens in Denmark. Citizenship Studies22(5): 507–522.
51.
SchrøderKCPhillipsL (2007) Complexifying media power: a study of the interplay between media and audience discourses on politics. Media, Culture & Society29(6): 890–915.
SmitASwartJBroersmaM (2024) Bypassing digital literacy: marginalized citizens’ tactics for participation and inclusion in digital societies. new media & society27: 3127–3145.
54.
TaipaleSOinasTKarhinenJ (2021) Heterogeneity of traditional and digital media use among older adults: a six-country comparison. Technology in Society66: 101642.
Van BruysselSDe WolfRVanden AbeeleM (2023) Who cares about digital disconnection? Exploring commodified digital disconnection discourse through a relational lens. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies31: 521–539.
57.
van DeursenAHelsperEJEynonR, et al. (2017) The compoundness and sequentiality of digital inequality. International Journal of Communication11: 452–473.
58.
van DijkJA (2020) The Digital Divide. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
VerhaertPVan AudenhoveLAnrijsS, et al. (2023) Digitale inclusie op lokaal niveau: Inzichten uit vijf Europese landen. Rapport in opdracht van de Vlaamse Overheid. Brussel: imec-SMIT, Vrije Universiteit Brussel.
61.
WaeterloosCWalraveMPonnetK (2022) The role of multi-platform news consumption in explaining civic participation during the COVID-19 pandemic: a communication mediation approach. new media & society26: 271–291.
62.
WangMPWangXViswanathK, et al. (2014) Digital inequalities of family life information seeking and family well-being among Chinese adults in Hong Kong: a population survey. Journal of Medical Internet Research16(10): e227.
