For Publishers
DiscoveryMetadataPeer reviewHostingPublishing
For Researchers
JoinPublishReviewCollect
Register
Blog
About
Search
Advanced search
My ScienceOpen
Search
For Publishers
For Researchers
Blog
About
2,066
views
38
references
 Top references
cited by
9
    
0 reviews
 Review
0
comments
 Comment
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
2 collections
    0
    shares
      88
      similar
       All similar

      Call for Papers: Hierarchies of domesticity – spatial and social boundaries. Deadline for submissions is 30th September, 2024. Full details can be read here.

      Articles to be no longer than 6,000 words (excluding footnotes and bibliography) and submitted in two forms: an anonymised version in which all references to the authors’ institution and publications are omitted; and a full version including the authors’ titles and institutional affiliations. For complete instructions on style, formatting, etc., please consult: https://www.plutojournals.com/wp-content/uploads/WOLG-Instructions-for-Authors2023.pdf 

      scite_

      Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation

      Volume 15, Issue 1
       
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Smart working is not so smart: Always-on lives and the dark side of platformisation

      research-article
      Bookmark

            Abstract

            This article investigates the lived experiences of remote workers during the Italian lockdown, and the role of digital platforms in their working and everyday life activities, as well as the consequences of home confinement measures on personal and working conditions. Drawing on 20 in-depth semi-structured interviews, the paper's findings suggest that, following a massive extension of transmedia work, remote workers experienced a ‘fractured’ and ‘always-on’ life. During the lockdown, the ever more pervasive role of digital media favoured the convergence of different spaces and times into the home, the erosion of the distinction between private and professional life and the exacerbation of previous social inequalities, especially inequalities in relation to gender and digital access. In this scenario, platform and surveillance capitalist logics were further reinforced, while ‘presence bleed’ in the experiences of workers increased.

            Content

            Author and article information

            Contributors
            Elisabetta Risi
            Riccardo Pronzato
            Journal
            Journal ID (doi): 10.2307/j50010512
            Journal ID (jcode): workorgalaboglob
            Title: Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation
            Publisher: Pluto Journals
            ISSN: 1745-641X
            ISSN: 1745-6428
            Publication date (Print): 1 January 2021
            Volume: 15
            Issue: 1 ( doiID: 10.13169/workorgalaboglob.15.issue-1 )
            Pages: 107-125
            Affiliations
            Elizabeth Risi is a Research Fellow in the Department of Communication, Arts and Media ‘Giampaolo Fabris’ at IULM University, Milan, Italy.
            Riccardo Pronzato is a PhD student in the Department of Communication, Arts and Media ‘Giampaolo Fabris’ at IULM University, Milan, Italy.
            Article
            Publisher ID: workorgalaboglob.15.1.0107
            DOI: 10.13169/workorgalaboglob.15.1.0107
            SO-VID: b475b50d-c7a8-41d9-8768-220105112e34
            Copyright © © Elisabetta Risi and Riccardo Pronzato, 2021
            License:

            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/.

            History
            Custom metadata
            lang eng

            ScienceOpen disciplines: Sociology,Labor law,Political science,Labor & Demographic economics,Political economics
            Keywords: remote work,social distancing,lockdown,Digital platforms,gender inequalities,Italy,digital labour,work-family conflict,COVID 19

            References

            1. Armano, E., A. Murgia & M. Teli (2017). Platform capitalism e confini del lavoro negli spazi digitali, Milano: Mimesis.

            2. Armano, E., T. Mazali & M. Teli (2020). ‘The production of neoliberal subjectivity in platform capitalism. Comparative interpretative hypotheses’, Sociologia della comunicazione, 59:106-126

            3. Barbieri, T. G. Basso & S. Scicchitano (2020). ‘Italian workers at risk during the Covid-19 epidemic’, National Institute for Public Policy Analysis' Working Paper No. 46. Accessed 8 December 2020. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3572065

            4. Berg, J., F. Bonnet & S. Soares (2020). ‘Working from home: Estimating the worldwide potential’, Vox Column, May 11. Accessed 10 December 2020. https://voxeu.org/article/working-home-estimating-worldwide-potential

            5. Bonacini, L., G. Gallo & S. Scicchitano (2020). Working from home and income inequality: Risks of a ‘new normal’ with COVID-19, Journal of Population Economics, 34(1):303-360.

            6. Brooks, K.J. (2020). ‘Zoom sued for allegedly sharing users’ personal data with Facebook', CBS News, April, 1. Accessed 10 December 2020. https://www.cbsnews.com/news/zoom-app-personal-data-selling-facebook-lawsuit-alleges/

            7. Bucher, T. (2018). If … then: Algorithmic power and politics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

            8. Casilli, A. & J. Posada (2019). ‘The platformization of labor and society’, in M. Graham & W.H. Dutton (eds.), Society and the Internet. How Networks of Information and Communication are Changing Our Lives (2nd ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press:293-306. doi: 10.1093/oso/9780198843498.003.0018

            9. Corbin, J., & A. Strauss (2008). Basics of qualitative research, London: Sage.

            10. Couldry, N. & A. Hepp (2013). ‘Conceptualizing mediatization: Contexts, traditions, arguments’, Communication Theory, 23:191-202.

            11. Couldry, N. & A. Hepp (2017). The mediated construction of reality, Cambridge: Polity Press.

            12. Couldry, N. & U.A. Mejias (2019). ‘Data colonialism: Rethinking big data's relation to the contemporary subject’, Television & New Media, 20 (4):336-349.

            13. Creswell, J. (2007) Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed.), Thousand Oaks: Sage.

            14. Czymara, C. S., A. Langenkamp & T. Cano (2020). ‘Cause for concerns: gender inequality in experiencing the COVID-19 lockdown in Germany’, European Societies:1-14. doi: 10.1080/14616696.2020.1808692

            15. Deuze, M. (2006). ‘Liquid life, convergence culture, and media work’ Working paper. Accessed 12 May 2021. https://scholarworks.iu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/2022/3343/Liquid%20Life%20Deuze%202006.pdf

            16. Di Nunzio, D. (2018). ‘Flessibilità e digitalizzazione del lavoro: forme organizzative, condizioni e soggettività‘, DigitCult-Scientific Journal on Digital Cultures, 3 (3):125-138.

            17. Dingel, J. & B. Neiman (2020). ‘How many jobs can be done at home?‘, Chicago: University of Chicago, Becker Friedman Institute for Economics. Accessed 8 December 2020. https://bfi.uchicago.edu/working-paper/how-many-jobs-can-be-done-at-home

            18. Eddleston, K.A. & J. Mulki (2017). ‘Toward understanding remote workers’ management of work-family boundaries: The complexity of workplace embeddedness', Group & Organization Management, 42 (3):346-387. doi: 10.1177/1059601115619548

            19. Evens, T. & K. Donders (2020). ‘Regulating digital platform power’, Journal of Digital Media & Policy, 11 (3):235-239. doi: 10.1386/jdmp_00024_2

            20. Fast, K. & A. Jansson (2019). Transmedia work: Privilege and precariousness in digital modernity, New York: Routledge.

            21. Fast, K. & J. Lindell (2016). ‘The elastic mobility of business elites - negotiating the “home” and “away” continuum’, European Journal of Cultural Studies, 19 (5):435-449. doi: 10.1177/1367549415609329

            22. Firestone, W.A. (1993). ‘Alternative arguments for generalizing from data as applied to qualitative research’, Educational Researcher, 22:16-23.

            23. Frazis, H. (2020). ‘Who telecommutes? Where is the time saved spent?‘, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Working Paper No. 523. Accessed 8 December 2020. https://www.bls.gov/osmr/research-papers/2020/pdf/ec200050.pdf

            24. Fuchs, C. (2020). ‘Everyday life and everyday communication in coronavirus capitalism’, tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 18 (1):375-399.

            25. Fumagalli, A. (2016). ‘Platform Capitalism: oltre la dicotomia uomo-macchina’, Effimera, November, 5. Accessed 8 December 2020. http://effimera.org/platform-capitalism-oltre-la-dicotomia-uomo-macchina-andrea-fumagalli/#_ftnref12

            26. Galperin, H. (2017). ‘Why are half of Latin Americans not online? A four-country study of reasons for Internet non-adoption’, International Journal of Communication, 11:3332-3354.

            27. Gillespie, T. (2015). ‘Platforms intervene’, Social Media+Society, 1 (1):1-2.

            28. Gillespie, T. (2016). ‘Algorithm’, in B. Peters (eds), Digital keywords: A vocabulary of information society and culture, Princeton: Princeton University Press:18-30.

            29. Giritli Nygren, K. & A. Olofsson (2020). ‘Managing the Covid-19 pandemic through individual responsibility: the consequences of a world risk society and enhanced ethopolitics’, Journal of Risk Research, 23 (7-8):1031-1035. doi: 10.1080/13669877.2020.1756382

            30. Global Workplace Analytics (2020). ‘Work-at-home after Covid-19 - Our forecast’. Accessed 14 December 2020. https://globalworkplaceanalytics.com/work-at-home-after-covid-19-our-forecast

            31. González, J.A. & C. Rendueles Menéndez de Llano (2020). ‘Capitalismo digital: fragilidad social, explotación y solucionismo tecnológico’, Teknokultura. Revista de Cultura Digital y Movimientos Sociales, 17 (2):95-101

            32. Gregg, M. (2011). Work's intimacy, Cambridge: Polity Press.

            33. Gregg, M. (2018). Counterproductive. Time management in the knowledge economy, Durham: Duke University Press.

            34. Gritti, M. & M.T. Santaguida (2020). ‘La rivoluzione dello smart working’, Agenzia Giornalistica Italia, 17 April. Accessed 23 February 2021. https://www.agi.it/economia/longform/2020-04-17/smartworking-futuro-lavoro-8355321/

            35. Hargittai, E. & M. Micheli (2019). ‘Internet skills and why they matter’, in M. Graham & W. H. Dutton (eds), Society and the internet. How networks of information and communication are changing our lives, Oxford: Oxford University Press:109-126.

            36. Horowitz, J. (2020). ‘Italy Announces restrictions over entire country in attempt to halt coronavirus’, The New York Times, March, 9. Accessed 9 December 2020. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/09/world/europe/italy-lockdown-coronavirus.html

            37. Huws, U. (2006). ‘Fixed, footloose, or fractured: Work, identity, and the spatial division of labor in the twenty-first century city’, Monthly Review, 57 (10):34-44.

            38. Huws, U. (2014). Labour in the global digital economy, London: Monthly Review Press.

            39. Huws, U. (2016). ‘Logged labour: a new paradigm of work organisation?‘, Work Organisation, Labour & Globalisation, 10 (1):7-26

            40. Huws, U. (2017) ‘Where did online platforms come from? The virtualization of work organization and the new policy challenges it raises’, in P. Meil & V. Kirov, Policy implications of virtual work, Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan:29-48. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-52057-5_2

            41. Jansson, A. (2016). ‘How to become an “elite cosmopolitan”: The mediatized trajectories of United Nations expatriates’, European Journal of Cultural Studies, 19 (5):465-480.

            42. Jansson, A. (2018). ‘Mediatization as a framework for social design: For a better life with media’, Design and Culture, 10 (3): 33-252. doi: 10.1080/17547075.2018.1511140

            43. John, A.S. (2020). ‘It's not just Zoom. Google Meet, Microsoft Teams, and Webex Have privacy issues, too’, Consumer Report, April, 30. Accessed 9 December 2020. https://www.consumerreports.org/video-conferencing-services/videoconferencing-privacy-issues-google-microsoft-webex/

            44. Jones, K. (2020). ‘How COVID-19 has impacted media consumption, by generation’, Visual Capitalist, April 7. Accessed 8 December 2020. https://www.visualcapitalist.com/media-consumption-covid-19/

            45. LaMonica, P.R. (2020). ‘Zoom is now worth more than nearly 85% of the S&P 500 stocks’, CNN, June, 16. Accessed 9 December 2020. https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/16/investing/zoom-market-value/index.html

            46. Lupton, D. (2014). Digital sociology, London: Routledge.

            47. Lupton, D. (2016). The quantified self. A sociology of self-tracking, Cambridge: Polity Press.

            48. Mahdawi, A. (2020). ‘Do you know how Zoom is using your data? Here's why you should’, The Guardian, 1 April. Accessed 10 December 2020. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/apr/01/do-you-know-how-zoom-is-using-your-data-heres-why-you-should

            49. Manovich, L. (2013). ‘Media after software’, Journal of Visual Culture, 12 (1):30-37.

            50. Markham, T. (2020). Digital life, Cambridge: Polity Press.

            51. Marres, N. (2017). Digital sociology: The reinvention of social research, Cambridge: Polity Press.

            52. Merchant, B. (2020). ‘Coronavirus is speeding up the Amazonification of the planet’, Medium, March, 19. Accessed 15 December 2020. https://onezero.medium.com/coronavirus-is-speeding-up-the-amazonification-of-the-planet-21cb20d16372

            53. Mies, M. (1986). Patriarchy and accumulation on a world scale: Women in the international division of labour, London: Zed Books.

            54. Mies, M., V. Bennholdt-Thomsen & C. von Werlhof (1988). Women: The last colony, London: Zed Books.

            55. Nguyen, M.H., J. Gruber, J. Fuchs, W. Marler, A. Hunsaker & E. Hargittai (2020). ‘Changes in digital communication during the COVID-19 global pandemic: Implications for digital inequality and future research’, Social Media +Society, 6 (3):2056305120948255. doi: 10.1177/2056305120948255

            56. Pasquale, F. (2016) ‘Two narratives of platform capitalism’, Yale Law & Policy Review, 35:309-319.

            57. Patton, M.Q. (2002) Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.), Thousand Oaks: Sage.

            58. Polit, D.F. & C.T. Beck (2010). ‘Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: Myths and strategies’, International Journal of Nursing Studies, 47 (11):1451-1458.

            59. Pronzato, R. & E. Risi (2021). Reframing everyday life. Implications of social distancing in Italy, International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy. doi: 10.1108/IJSSP-07-2020-0350

            60. Reeves, R.V. & J. Rothwell (2020). ‘Class and COVID: How the less affluent face double risks’, Brookings Institution, 27 March. Accessed 27 March 2020. https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2020/03/27/class-and-covid-how-the-less-affluent-face-double-risks/amp/

            61. Rigi, J. & R. Prey (2015). ‘Value, rent, and the political economy of social media’, The Information Society, 31 (5):392-406.

            62. Risi, E. (2015) ‘Intersezioni e confini del lavoro, tra spazi e tempi urbani e digitali. Il caso dei knowledge workers a Milano’, in E. Armano and A. Murgia (eds), Le reti del lavoro gratuito. Spazi urbani e nuove soggettività, Verona: Ombre Corte:59-76.

            63. Risi, E., Pronzato, R. & G. Di Fraia (2020a). ‘Everything is inside the home: the boundaries of home confinement during the Italian lockdown’, European Societies, 23 (S1):S464-S477. doi: 10.1080/14616696.2020.1828977

            64. Risi, E., R. Pronzato & G. Di Fraia (2020b). ‘Living and working confined at home: Boundaries and platforms during the lockdown’, Journal of Cultural Analysis and Social Change, 5 (2):1-4. doi: 10.20897/jcasc/9253

            65. Rosa, H. (2013). Social acceleration: A new theory of modernity, New York: Columbia University Press.

            66. Srnicek, N. (2016). Platform capitalism, Cambridge: Polity Press.

            67. Staab, P. & O. Nachtwey (2016). ‘Market and Labour Control in Digital Capitalism’, tripleC: Communication, Capitalism & Critique, 14 (2):457-474.

            68. Stevano, S., Ali, R. & M. Jamieson (2020). ‘Essential for what? A global social reproduction view on the re-organisation of work during the COVID-19 pandemic’, Canadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue Canadienne d'études du développement:1-22. doi: 10.1080/02255189.2020.1834362

            69. Terranova, T. (2004). Network culture: Cultural politics for the information age, London: Pluto Press.

            70. Van Dijck, J., T. Poell & M. De Waal (2018). The platform society: Public values in a connective world, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

            71. Wajcman, J. (2010). ‘Domestic technology: labour-saving or enslaving?‘, in C. Hanks, Technology and values: Essential readings, Chichester: John Wiley & Sons:273-288.

            72. Wajcman, J. (2015). Pressed for time, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

            73. Wellard, S. & L. McKenna (2001). ‘Turning tapes into text: Issues surrounding the transcription of interviews’, Contemporary Nurse, 11 (2/3):180-186.

            74. Zuboff, S. (2019). The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power, New York: Public Affairs.

            Comments

            Comment on this article