Social capital is a highly controversial topic due to its complexity of measurement and ambiguity in understanding. According to Putnam (1993), one of the most famous scholars on social capital, its three main components are trust and other social values, moral obligations and norms, and social networks of citizen activity. Thus, social capital can be understood as all these features combined in order to facilitate cooperation for all the participants. However, as this definition seems to be narrow, I would propose a broader one that includes other elements of social structure on the macro level, focusing more on the relations between the state, civil society, and the private sector. It is also crucial to mention that social capital is not an entirely positive concept — it favors both beneficial and harmful social connections.
Recently, a decline in social capital was observed in the USA. Community, solidarity, and democratic society are among many elements affected (Putnam, 2000). For instance, people became less engaged in informal socializing. The role of digital media and technologies is not of the least importance. People started to use smartphones and TV as a form of passive entertainment instead of spending time with their friends (Quan-Haase, 2021). However, increasing evidence supports the opposite view, namely, that social media help people to keep in touch even when there is no possibility of seeing each other. Thus, Quan-Haase (2021) argues that it supplements interaction rather than replaces real-life communication. To conclude, the role of digital media in social capital depends on an individual and their personal use of the technologies.
References
Putnam, R. (1993). The prosperous community: Social capital and public life. The American prospect, 13(4).
Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling alone: America’s declining social capital. Routledge.
Quan-Haase, A. (2021). Technology and Society. (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.