“Place identity” as a criterion for supporting network communications: theoretical analysis and empirical estimation

Introduction. Modern social processes denoted by concepts such as globalization, glocalization, mediatization, and development of network communication change the meaning of life and the symbolic forms of a human as part of these processes. Symbolic resources and socio-cultural means of constructing reality, concepts of identities at different levels are becoming of key importance in the functioning of societies, communities and territories. Thus, M. Castells has drawn attention to the fact that in the modern information society, territorial, regional, local, religious, ethnic (diaspora), and other types of identities are becoming determinants of important social change [10; 27; 28]. The concept of “place identity” acquires scientific and practical value, integrating the necessary value, emotional, rational, business, symbolic and other loadbearing mental structures as benchmarks of human life necessary for a comfortable existence. The purpose for the paper is to identify key characteristics of concepts of identity and “place identity” associated with mechanisms of network cooperation, and to distinguish between levels of strata affinity, presentation of theoretical constructs and empirical evaluations of these phenomena.

The research was conducted within the scientific tradition of constructivist sociology. The theoretical significance is defined by the specification and justification of a number of concepts related to the definition of “place identity”. The practical significance lies, on the one hand, in the need to activate the regional potential and strengthen the regional identity associated with it, on the other hand, in recurrent crises of “negative identity”. The latter create an opportunity to manipulate collective identity based on the rhetoric of “us and others” aimed at dehumanizing different population groups. In general, “place identity” is referred to as an individual’s identification with their “small motherland”, the place of their residence which is generally defined during the struggle with non-differential global symbols [28, p 112].

The research tested basic hypotheses : “place identity” in the information society must maintain value, emotional, rational, symbolic, business, and other symbolic pillars necessary for a relatively comfortable human existence; the level of social preparedness for inclusion in the global communications network is directly linked to the relations of regional identity (“place identity”) in respective contexts “communication” – “identification” – including on the scale of “Friend”–“Foe”; the explosive spread of global information media as widespread phenomena gradually takes citizens beyond the local circle, spreading various forms of globalization to a high level of all Russians’ “general mentality”. The more developed in the local society is the assessment of “Friend” at the global/national level the deeper penetrate the relations of the global network society into these communication networks.

Research novelty: the authors justify the necessity of introducing the concept of “place identity” into contextual circulation; by meaningful signs, the concept is associated with the socio-economic criteria of network communication support and is determined by the mechanisms for distinguishing the levels of strata affinity. It is proved that the circles of mutual understanding in Russia have rapidly grown, which is primarily associated with the spread of free means of communication. The latter primarily reinforce the importance of professional and social contacts, which is consistent with the global trends. In terms of analysis of the conflict between “local” and “global”, the findings do not confirm the forecast of M. Castells. We agree with O.I. Shkaratan that “small motherland” is the basis of reproduction of identities, and that the means of social mobility traditional for the Russian society are currently blocked.