The article summarizes the authors’ last year discussion of the research experience of studying the states of “emergencies” uncertainty and risks in sociology and their applicability to the study of social and sociocultural pandemic processes unfolding in Ukrainian society. It is emphasized that culture in its value-meaning and information-participatory dimensions remains on the margins of public attention under the pandemic, although its influence and consequences are significant and need close attention. There are three relevant areas of analysis: the value mentality of society, the information sphere of media and social networks, and the cultural participation of the population. To highlight the features of the current cultural and information-communication orders, the data of the monitoring study “Ukrainian Society – 2020” of the Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine and survey data of other domestic sociological centres were used. The tension and contradiction between the preferences of citizens for the values of “freedom”, “trust”, and “security”, as well as manifestations of imbalance in the value dichotomy of “public vs private”, are disclosed. The paper considers the phenomenon of infodemia, its factors and manifestations in Ukrainian society. The authors prove that the persistent scepticism of media audiences remains a hallmark of the information climate. Indicators of uncertainty about information sources are increasingly becoming markers of attitudes towards traditional and new media. Vagueness and ambiguity as characteristics of the trust phenomenon in the media correspond to the coronavirus pandemic’s new cultural and information-communicative orders. Changing the contexts of everyday life in the conditions of quarantine restrictions complicates the realization of professional and educational responsibilities and worsens the possibilities of cultural participation and recreation, which resonates with socio-economic, political, and technological limitations.
Kostenko, N. (2021). Cultural and informational-communication pandemic orders. In Issues in the Development of Sociological Theory: Conceptual Strategies for the Study of Social Consequences of COVID-19 Pandemic: materials of the XVII International Scientific and Practical Conference (2020, December 18–19) (pp. 69-71). Kyiv: Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. URL: https://soc.univ.kiev.ua/sites/default/files/newsfiles/2020-issuesinthedevelopmentofsociologicaltheory-proceedings.pdf [in Ukrainian]
Cañada, J.A. (2019). Hybrid Threats and Preparedness Strategies: The Reconceptualization of Biological Threats and Boundaries in Global Health Emergencies. Sociological Research Online, 24 (1), 93-110.
Kostenko, N. (2016). In the state of “emergency”: cultural efficacy. Sotsiologiya: teoriya, metody, marketing – Sociology: theory, methods, marketing, 4, 102-118 [in Ukrainian]
Adey, P., Anderson, B., Graham, S. (2015). Introduction: Governing Emergencies: Beyond Exceptionality. Theory, Culture& Society, 32 (2), 3-17.
Vildavski, A., Deik, K. (1994). Risk perception theories: who is afraid, what are they afraid of and why. Thesis, 5, 268-276 [in Russian]
Slovic, P. (2000). The perception of risk. Earthscan.
Skokova, L. (2020, December 18–19). Features of the social and cultural analysis of the risks and crisis. In Issues in the Development of Sociological Theory: Conceptual Strategies for the Study of Social Consequences of COVID-19 Pandemic: materials of the XVII International Scientific and Practical Conference (2020, December 18–19) (pp. 131-134). Kyiv: Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv. URL: https://soc.univ.kiev.ua/sites/default/files/newsfiles/2020-issuesinthedevelopmentofsociologicaltheory-proceedings.pdf [in Ukrainian]
Radu, R. (2020, July-September). Fighting the ‘Infodemic’: Legal Responses to COVID-19 Disinformation. Social Media + Society, 1-4.
Shepherd, H., MacKendrick, N., Mora, G.C. (2020). Pandemic Politics: Political Worldviews and COVID-19 Beliefs and Practices in an Unsettled Time. Socius: Sociological Research for a Dynamic World, 6, 1-18.
Lazzarato, M. (2006, October) The machine. Transversal.at. URL: http://eipcp.net/transversal/1106/lazzarato/en
Opinions and views of the Ukrainian population on the origin of coronavirus and its spread in the world: May-June 2020. Kyiv: Kyiv International Institute of Sociology. URL: https://www.kiis.com.ua/?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=952&page=1 [in Ukrainian]
Thevenot, L. (2006). Creative configurations in the humanities and figures of the social community. Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, 1. URL: https://magazines.gorky.media/nlo/2006/1/kreativnye-konfiguraczii-v-gumanitarnyh-naukah-i-figuraczii-soczialnoj-obshhnosti.html [in Russian]
Assessment of government actions, coronavirus epidemic and reaction to current events. (2020). Kyiv: Kyiv International Institute of Sociology. URL: https://www.kiis.com.ua/?lang=ukr&cat=reports&id=964&page=3)
Education and the pandemic: what Ukrainians think about distance learning and how they evaluate external independent evaluation. (2020). Kyiv: Razumkov Centre. URL: https://razumkov.org.ua/napriamky/sotsiologichni-doslidzhennia/osvita-i-pandemiia-shcho-ukraintsi-dumaiut-pro-dystantsiine-navchannia-ta-iak-otsiniuiut-zno
Nesterenko, Ye.O., Liudohovska, K.V. (2020). Digest of U-Report surveys: 2nd quarter of 2020 (studying during quarantine, power economy development, reform of boarding schools). Ukr. socìum – Ukrainian Society, 2 (73), 185-195 [in Ukrainian]