Democracy in the Network Age - Term Paper Example

?Democracy in the Network Age Introduction The age of social networking and computing has opened up infinite possibilities for social, political and economic advancement for private individuals, firms, and politicians. Being online allows people to download a wide variety of content be it music files or soft ware. Nonetheless, the rapid and exponential change over a short period has created a plethora of issues and a range of new crimes have emerged. For instance, while software companies i.e. Microsoft may supply open source soft and freeware with the intention of promoting their products (Liberacki). Some users will download it “crack” it and have access to premium features. While they undoubtedly know this is illegal they are also aware it is almost impossible to be prosecuted due to the anonymity the internet allows. This is not to mention the many that download such content and share it. They are also part to the crime but, unfortunately, not very many users are cognizant of the extent to which they should use some of the software and file sharing facilities. Moreover, while there exist laws against pirating of content; for example, peer to peer violations attract fines of up to 500,000 dollars; a survey showed that 93 percent of the respondents illegally download material nevertheless (Liberacki). The music and movie industries are some of the casualties of the lack of restrictive policies and /or enforcing of the same. With the availability of high speed digital duplication software and hardware, pirated content can be reproduced with no degradation from the authentic material (Intellectual Property Rights). Most of this occurs through file sharing or peer to peer networks, here, the content is availed free of charge. Companies like YouTube are forced to remove some of the content uploaded by users due to copyright issues, for instance a just as someone may buy an original copy of a newly released movie and upload it on YouTube. While YouTube will remove this, there are hundreds of websites that specialize in selling or giving way this content. Publishers and software manufactures stood to make a killing from the online market through selling of premium software and EBooks. Nevertheless, due to the technology of file sharing, when someone downloads any premium content, they can give it out or resell it at will, notwithstanding copyright issues. Currently, the existing policies and legislation are not capable of dealing with these issues because they latter are changing so fast and new concepts developed every day leaving a lot of grey areas, which cyber criminals exploit to the maximum. Former French president Nicholas Zarkozy is on record having said that governments are duty bound to set rules limiting misusing of the internet more so in issue of privacy and piracy. Besides, even when policies do exist inside the USA the same may be unheard of or lax in other countries where the software may end up. As such, new and updated policies need to be formulated, and they should be explicit pertaining to the crimes, furthermore; governments should have the ability to enforce this legislation. Democracy, while benefiting from the internet and social networking especially from an action has also suffered major blows. Take for instance the situations in Egypt and Syria. The internet was used bring about democracy through a peoples’ revolution mostly planned online through social networks. While recognizing the crucial role played by social networks in this, the danger therein must also be considered. In Liberia, the same was done, but there was a plethora of emerging issues including that it may have been politically instigated by western powers that had interests in the countries resources. Thousands died in the ensuing protests, and what started as online activism lead to civil war. Thus, while justifying the need to give people a chance for self expression online. It is incumbent of us to examine the extent to which the internet can be used in the quest to obtain democracy without disregarding the damage that it can cause. Existing policies on the internet and democracy allow for firms and political sides to manipulate the public’s opinion albeit covertly. For instance, many Americans are beginning to depend more on the internet for news rather than mainstream Media. As such, many politicians of the day for instance are depending on the internet to communicate with their voters. The Obama campaign for instance is said to have immensely benefited from the internet. In fact, it has been claimed that he may not be president had it not been for the internet (Pecorino). While this is open to debate, we can be sure that he used the internet in his campaign more than any other candidate before him. Despite the fact that not claiming Obama’s win was undemocratic, it portends a possibility that the person most likely to be elected in America is the person who is best able to use the internet and influence the people thus. This means that one’s popularity, especially in a big country like America where it is difficult to visit every corner a candidate’s popularity is based on how he appears online. However, the internet in many ways is similar to a Wiki and people can set up websites overnight supplying to give “credible” information to suit their own purposes. Since more and more Americans are depending on it for information, it is easy for rumors to spread. Nearly a quarter of Americans polled claimed to have learnt some pertinent information influencing their voting online (Pecorino). Racism, and other forms of prejudice can be projected online through social networks such as Facebook. As a result, the public’s opinion may be shaped, not by facts but by rumors that cause fear and result in negative opinion on a candidate. Many are of the opinion that the internet and social networking are healthy for democracy, and justifiability so since they allow for virtually unlimited access to information. However, since the internet is primarily based on western culture, it tends to propagate western style democracy and portrays it as superior to anything else (Justyna). Opinion polls, which are often conducted online, are usually sponsored by interested parties; this makes it comparatively easy to manipulate the results to favor a certain candidate or product. This may influence the public to vote for the candidate who seems most likely to win, as such, democracy is undermined. The aforementioned issue of file sharing has also been used extensively by different candidate to avail damaging information, video clips and picture of their competition, which has it done with the intention of damaging their reputations, and making manipulating the users into subjective judgments. Once again, anonymity allows for people to hide behind the privacy offered by the internet and mudsling. While it may be a tad too radical to go china way and literally censor the intent, the current policies are too unrestrictive. It is vital middle ground be determined, and a praxis found between how much freedom is too much and how much is too little. As such, democracy, which many claim the online freedom is protecting, is quickly becoming a casualty of the same. Since that social networking sites such as Facebook and Tweeter profoundly shape opinions of the user’s unlimited online freedom opens avenues for manipulation. For instance, opponents of a certain leader for instance may create a fake profile of them using their name and pictures. They then gather many unsuspecting fans who they misinform or anger by posting misinformation and portraying the said individual in a negative light, such may include racial slurs. This will result to the followers of friends being offended and possibly not voting for the individual based on things he never said or did. Without any form of regulation, monopolies may be formed online restrict the main source of information to a few companies. This portends a considerable danger in posterity since the firms would have too much power over information and with people being so dependent on the internet, this would create a risk for public manipulation. Currently, Google’s apparent monopoly is under investigation by the European Union (Jowitt). In conclusion, while not asking for draconian changes in the policies governing internet uses, it evident that some restriction needs to be put in place. With great power comes immense responsibility, while the internet allows anyone to have the full power of information “and misinformation” as it were. Not everyone is responsible enough to hold that power. As such, new and more stringent policies need to be developed or else, ideologies like democracy may be sacrificed on an altar of manipulation and misinformation. Works Cited Jowitt, Tom. Internet Regulation Needed, Sarkozy Tells Tech Bosses. Tecweek Europe. Web. 2011. 15 August 2012 Justyna P. Negative Effects of Internet Usage. Ehow. 2012. Web. 15 August 2012. Liberacki, Elizabeth. Pros and Cons of Peer to Peer file sharing and Open source Licensing. 2011. Web. 15 August 2012 “Intellectual Property Rights” Cisco. n.d. Web. 15 August 2012. Pecorino Philip. Impact of Internet and Communication Networks and Technologies on Concepts of and forms of Democratic Government and Rule. 2009. Web. 15 August 2012. Read More