The assessment of scholarly literature on the Information Society provided in this paper sets out and distinguishes between the analytical foundations of mainstream and critical contributions from a selection of disciplines and fields with a view to considering why there is so little reciprocal engagement among them, and whether there are new opportunities to promote a dialogue with those who hold the power to establish policies and investment practices with regard to information and communication technologies. Based on a review of hundreds of works, it is argued that a broader range of analytical frameworks needs to be considered if today’s policies and strategies in this area are not to perpetuate inequality and injustice. In particular, we need to acknowledge that a plurality of visions of future information societies exists, embracing potentially conflicting values and priorities. More emphasis needs to be given to analytical approaches that privilege human well‐being and inclusivity.

PAGES
165 – 186
DOI
All content is freely available without charge to users or their institutions. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission of the publisher or the author. Articles published in the journal are distributed under a http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Issues
Also in this issue:
-
Agnes Horvath, Magic and the Will to Science: A Political Anthropology of Liminal Technicality
-
Gibson Burrell, Ronald Hartz, David Harvie, Geoff Lightfoot, Simon Lilley and Friends, Shaping for Mediocrity: The Cancellation of Critical Thinking at our Universities
-
Bas de Boer, How Scientific Instruments Speak: Postphenomenology and Technological Mediations in Neuroscientific Practice
-
Bjørn Lomborg, False Alarm
-
How does innovation arise in the bicycle sector? The users’ role and their betrayal in the case of the ‘gravel bike’