Institute of Sociology NASU

Digital inequality, scrolling, and death

stmm. 2026 (1): 202–209

DOI https://doi.org/10.15407/sociology2026.01.202

Full text: https://stmm.in.ua/archive/ukr/2026-1/16.pdf

OLEKSANDR ZUBARIEV, Candidate of Sciences in Sociology (PhD), Associate Professor at the Department of Sociology, Educational and Scientific Institute of Sociology and Media Communications, V.N. Karazin Kharkiv National University (6, Svobody Sq., Kharkiv, 61022)

alexandr.zubarev@karazin.ua

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9722-2851

The author proposes to examine the metamorphoses of the social structure in the context of the emergence of a digital society. Digitalization leads to two socially significant consequences: first, the transformation of mechanisms of power, and second, the intensification of digital inequality. The first aspect is analyzed through Michel Foucault’s concept of power. In Discipline and Punish, Foucault traces the transformation of power in the eighteenth century, referring to Jeremy Bentham’s idea of the panopticon. The prison model proposed by Bentham makes it possible to replace demonstrative corporal punishment with a system in which prisoners do not know when they are being observed but are aware that surveillance may occur at any moment. Foucault extends this principle of exercising power to society as a whole.

However, contemporary digital technologies render architectural ingenuity unnecessary: the panoptic model of social control transforms into a post-panoptic one, in which every individual can be seen anywhere and at any time and, moreover, actively seeks such visibility. Seduction and simulation become new instruments of digital surveillance: a person attached to the screen becomes detached from real social communication, as in the practice of scrolling. At the same time, digital inequality deepens in the post-panoptic digital society, as certain social groups find themselves in a disadvantaged position compared to those who possess more advanced digital skills. Furthermore, some services cannot be accessed without the necessary digital competencies. Access to digital resources determines opportunities for survival, education, maintaining social ties, and participation in social life.

The author argues that despite the positive public perception of digital reform, the process of digitalization requires a critical approach, since the omnipresence of digital technologies not only facilitates access to services but also exacerbates digital inequality and compels certain groups to experience persistent stress associated with insufficient digital skills.

Keywords: panopticism, post-panopticism, digital society, digital inequality, power

Referenes:

1. Bauman, Z. (2000). Liquid Modernity. Polity Press.

2. Beck, U. (1992). Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity / Trans. by M. Ritter. Sage.

3. Foucault, M. (1998). Supervise and Punish / Trans. by P. Tarashchuk. [In Ukrainian]. Osnovy.

4. KIIS. (2024). Public Opinions of Ukraine's Population on State Electronic Services in 2024: Analytical Report. [In Ukrainian]. UNDP. Ukraine.

5. Kovalenko, I., Meliakova, Y., Kalnytskyi, E., & Nesterenko, K. (2023). Postpanopticon: Control and media in the new digital reality. Filosofija. Sociologija, 34(3), 219-227. https://doi.org/10.6001/fil-soc.2023.34.3.1

6. Mathiesen, T. (1997). The Viewer Society: Michel Foucault's "Panopticon" Revisited. Universitetsforlaget. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362480697001002003

7. Sokuryanska, L.H. & Holikov, O.S. (2017). III Congress of the Sociological Association of Ukraine: New inequalities - new conflicts: ways of overcoming (summary of results). [In Ukrainian]. Ukrainskyi Sotsium, 4(63), 190-204.

Recieved 15.12.2025

Accepted for publication after review 07.01.2026