Second, because media have the symbolic power to construct general realities, media institutions in themselves are a resource whose long-term distribution can be unjust. First, media are a key resource that enables ‘reality’ – the reality of particular social and political territories – to be framed one way rather than another as a result, media, through their operations, can perpetrate specific ‘injustices framing’ (Fraser 2005: 79) the social world. This dimension of social justice has two fundamental aspects. That is why improved ‘access to information and communications technology’, including ‘universal affordable access to the Internet’ by 2020, is a Sustainable Development Goal ( SDG 9.c). Nonetheless, since connection is important to people’s possibilities of action, the uneven distribution of opportunities to access and use media is a dimension of social justice in its own right. Media as infrastructures of connection are not therefore an automatic good. The contributions of media and communications to social progress must always be considered at more specific levels and contexts through an analysis of the contrasting stakes that different populations – and different groups, classes and ethnicities within specific populations – have in the possibilities for connection, meaning and action that media provide. Communication, depending on its contents and directedness, can do either good or harm we will explore these paradoxes later in the chapter. For example, globalization has engendered indifference and disparity of attention while at the same time promoting dialogue and solidarity. But because media impact is always contestable, the consequences of media practice and media innovations for social progress cannot be determined at a general level. The political struggles against slavery in the 19th century and for the civil rights of all ethnic groups in the late 20th century were also cultural struggles that drew on the media resources of the day. Such access enriches the modalities of political action and protest, with consequences for social change and social progress ( SPI ‘Personal rights’, ‘Personal freedom of choice’). Through media, individuals and groups have more cultural resources, both new and archived, with which to interpret and challenge cultural forms. Overall the chapter reflects on how media and communications flows and infrastructures both maintain and challenge asymmetries of power, with complex implications for social progress. Fourth, we consider media as a specific site of struggle for social progress, arguing that measures of social progress themselves need to be expanded to take account of the human needs (such as voice) that media serve. Third, we examine the changing governance of media infrastructures, the issues of social justice that such infrastructures raise and the counter-movements to which they give rise. Second, we examine how media – as infrastructures of connection – contribute to public knowledge and enable new types of encounter between people on various scales, while also enabling counter-movements for social progress. We first explore key developments in media infrastructures and communication flows across the world, bringing out salient differences in the local evolution of, and inequalities in media access. This is a good time to think critically about ‘connection’ and its potential contribution to social progress. Media infrastructures have acquired huge complexity as a result of rapid technological change and the uneven spread of access.

Developments in digital technologies over the last 30 years have expanded massively human beings’ capacity to communicate and connect.

Shadow warrior chapter 13