Extended Summary
Over the past two decades, digital technologies have fundamentally transformed the structural dynamics of social life. The widespread adoption of the internet, the centrality of social media platforms in everyday communication, and the integration of mobile technologies into daily routines have reshaped how individuals perceive, interpret, and produce cultural meanings. This transformation cannot be reduced to changes in the use of technical tools; rather, it represents a profound reconfiguration of cultural production, circulation, and experience. Digitalization has extended cultural interaction beyond spatial boundaries and positioned individuals as continuously connected actors within global communication networks. In this context, digital culture emerges as a defining feature of contemporary societies and a key framework for understanding generational differences.
One of the most significant consequences of digital transformation is its uneven impact across generations. While older generations encountered digital technologies later in life, younger generations—particularly Generation Z—were born into an already digitalized world. As the first generation to grow up with the internet, social media, and mobile technologies as taken-for-granted elements of everyday life, Generation Z occupies a distinctive position in the literature. For this generation, digital technologies are not merely functional communication tools but integral components of daily existence, shaping social interaction, identity formation, and cultural participation. Understanding this relationship requires a multidimensional analytical framework that brings together generation theory, digital culture studies, and the network society approach.
The concept of generation has long been central to sociological analyses of social change. Beyond chronological age, generations are defined by shared historical, social, and cultural experiences that shape collective orientations, values, and worldviews. Mannheim’s theory of generations emphasizes that individuals who experience major social transformations during formative periods of their lives develop a form of “generation consciousness,” which influences how they interpret and respond to social realities. From this perspective, digitalization functions as a critical historical condition that differentiates Generation Z from preceding cohorts. Their shared experience of growing up within digital environments contributes to distinctive cultural practices and modes of social engagement.
At the same time, generation theories have been subject to critique, particularly for their tendency to portray generations as homogeneous entities. Scholars have emphasized that intra-generational differences—shaped by socioeconomic status, education, cultural capital, and access to technology—must be taken into account. Accordingly, Generation Z should be understood as a heterogeneous group whose digital experiences vary significantly across social contexts. This insight is crucial for avoiding technological determinism and simplistic assumptions about digital competence based solely on age.
Digital culture provides a critical lens through which to examine these dynamics. Conceptually, digital culture refers to the set of practices, meanings, norms, and symbolic forms that emerge through the use of digital technologies. Unlike traditional cultural models that separate production from consumption, digital culture blurs this distinction by enabling users to participate actively in content creation, distribution, and reinterpretation. Online platforms facilitate participatory, interactive, and networked forms of cultural engagement, allowing individuals to become both consumers and producers of cultural content. This participatory dimension is particularly salient for Generation Z, whose everyday practices are deeply embedded in social media, content-sharing platforms, and online communities.
The theoretical framework of the network society, developed most notably by Manuel Castells, offers a macro-level perspective on the relationship between digital culture and social structure. In the network society, social relations, power structures, and cultural processes are organized around digitally mediated networks rather than hierarchical institutions. Digital culture both reflects and reinforces this network logic, operating through decentralized, flexible, and scalable communication structures. For Generation Z, participation in digital networks constitutes a primary mode of socialization, enabling transnational connections and continuous interaction across spatial and temporal boundaries.
However, digital culture is not inherently emancipatory. While digital platforms provide opportunities for visibility, self-expression, and participation, they also introduce new forms of control, surveillance, and inequality. Algorithmic governance, data extraction, and platform-based economies shape what content becomes visible and whose voices are amplified. As scholars such as van Dijck have argued, digital culture must be understood as a site where power relations are reconfigured rather than eliminated. Generation Z’s engagement with digital culture therefore takes place within structures that simultaneously enable agency and impose constraints.
Identity formation represents another central dimension of digital culture. Online environments allow individuals to present, negotiate, and reconfigure their identities through profiles, posts, visual content, and interactions. From a performative perspective, identity is not a fixed attribute but an ongoing process shaped through repeated practices and representations. For Generation Z, digital platforms serve as key arenas for this performative construction of identity, facilitating experimentation and self-expression while also subjecting individuals to normative pressures and surveillance mechanisms.
Debates surrounding “digital natives” and “digital immigrants” have attempted to conceptualize generational differences in relation to technology. Although the notion of digital natives has been influential, it has also been widely criticized for oversimplifying generational distinctions and overlooking structural inequalities. Empirical research demonstrates that digital skills and competencies are not uniformly distributed among young people and are shaped by factors such as education, access, and social environment. Consequently, the concept of digital nativity provides a limited explanatory framework and must be complemented by analyses of digital literacy, participation, and inequality.
In sum, this study argues that Generation Z’s position within digital culture cannot be adequately explained through single-dimensional or technologically deterministic approaches. Instead, it requires a comprehensive framework that integrates generation theory, digital culture studies, and the network society perspective. Generation Z emerges as both a product and an active agent of digital transformation, engaging in cultural production, identity construction, and social participation within digitally mediated networks. At the same time, their experiences are shaped by power relations, platform dynamics, and social inequalities embedded in digital environments.
By adopting a critical and multidimensional approach, this analysis contributes to a deeper understanding of how digital culture reshapes generational experiences and social structures. It highlights the need to move beyond generalized assumptions about youth and technology and to recognize the complex, contested, and evolving nature of digital culture in shaping the lives of Generation Z.
Kaynakça
- Bauman, Z. (2013). Liquid modernity. Polity Press.
- Bennett, S., Maton, K., & Kervin, L. (2008). The ‘digital natives’ debate: A critical review of the evidence. British Journal of Educational Technology, 39(5), 775–786. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2007.00793.x
- Castells, M. (2008). The New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 616, 78–93. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25097995
- Castells, M. (2010). Globalisation, Networking, Urbanisation: Reflections on the Spatial Dynamics of the Information Age. Urban Studies, 47(13), 2737–2745. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43079956
- Castells, M. (2010). The rise of the network society (2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
- Castells, M. (2022). The Network Society Revisited. American Behavioral Scientist, 67(7), 940-946. https://doi.org/10.1177/00027642221092803
- Couldry, N., Hepp, A. (2017). The mediated construction of reality. Cambridge: Polity Press.
- Eyerman, R., Turner, B. S. (1998). Outline of a theory of generations. European Journal of Social Theory, 1(1), 91–106. https://doi.org/10.1177/136843198001001007
- Fuchs, C. (2017). Social media: A critical introduction (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications
- Giddens, A. (1994). Modernliğin sonuçları (çev Ersin Kuşdil). İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları
- Hargittai, E. (2010). Digital na(t)ives? Variation in internet skills and uses among members of the “Net Generation.” Sociological Inquiry, 80(1), 92–113. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-682X.2009.00317.x
- Jenkins, H. (2006). Convergence culture: Where old and new media collide. New York University Press.
- Lister, M., Dovey, J., Giddings, S., Grant, I., & Kelly, K. (2009). New media: A critical introduction (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
- Livingstone, S. (2014). Developing social media literacy: How children learn to interpret risky opportunities on social network sites. Communications, 39(3), 283–303. https://doi.org/10.1515/commun-2014-0113
- Mannheim, K. (1952). The problem of generations. In P. Kecskemeti (Ed.), Essays on the sociology of knowledge (pp. 276–322). Routledge & Kegan Paul. (Original work published 1928)
- Manovich, L. (2001). The language of new media. MIT Press.
- Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
- Selwyn, N. (2009). The digital native – myth and reality. Aslib Proceedings, 61(4), 364–379. https://doi.org/10.1108/00012530910973776
- Strauss, W., Howe, N. (1991). Generations: The history of America’s future, 1584 to 2069. William Morrow.
- Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. Basic Books.
- Turner, A. (2015). Generation Z: Technology and social interest. The Journal of Individual Psychology, 71(2), 103–113. https://doi.org/10.1353/jip.2015.0021
- van Dijck, J. (2013). The culture of connectivity: A critical history of social media. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- van Dijk, J. (2006). The network society (2th ed.). London Sage Publications.
- Woodman, D., Wyn, J. (2015). Youth and generation: Rethinking change and inequality in the lives of young people. Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
- Zemke, R., Raines, C. ve Filipczak, B. (2013). Generations at work: managing the clash of boomers, gen xers, and gen yers in the workplace. New York: Amacom.