Internet and Democracy - Essay Example

Internet and Democracy The discovery and introduction of internet and World Wide Web (WWW) technologies has revolutionised the world. The social, political and cultural lives have changed a lot after the introduction of internet technologies. People who relied heavily on conventional means like radio, television, news papers etc for information now shifted their attention towards internet and WWW for their basic quest for information. The Internet provides new opportunities for information, communication and participation. The communication through internet is independent of distance, easy to use and not expensive also. Internet communication is probably the fastest way of communication. The introduction of internet and other computer based communication technologies has opened up many possibilities in different aspects of human life. Distance is no longer a constraint for information interchange because of the advanced internet and wireless technologies. Even the outer universe communication and data analysis is made possible with the introduction of wireless technology and internet. Most of the common people believe that internet is just for information interchange only. But internet can influence other regions of the human life as well. It can assist job seekers in getting jobs, it can assist students in improving their learning potentials, it can act as an excellent medium for advertisement, it can act as a market where people can sell and purchase goods or services etc. Even the politics seem to be one beneficiary of the internet. In early 90’s it is believed that internet can enhance the political process of democracy immensely. Though internet requires lot of financial and intellectual investments, the lack of centralized control over the internet raised doubts about the implementation of internet technologies for the strengthening of democracy. “Democracy involves a separation of powers and popular participation in governmental affairs. During the era of the Enlightenment and 18th century democratic revolutions, public spheres emerged where individuals could discuss and debate issues of common concern” (Douglas Kellner). Democracy can be defined as a system in all citizens can directly participate in the decision-making process. Proponents of democracy believe legislative, judicial, and executive powers should be handled by the people. Or in other words the representatives in these three sectors must be appointed by the people. As per former president of US, Abraham Lincoln, a democratic government is of the people, by the people and for the people, a definition still widely accepted by the proponents of democracy. There are lot of factors which can influence democracy. In fact because of the intellectual power and wisdom, freedom of expression is the basic right every people want to preserve. In a democratic setup only people can enjoy the freedom as much as they required when compared to some other socialistic republics like China, which is controlled by communism. Because of the tight discipline and rules, the people of communist countries have lack of freedom for the expression of their thoughts through a medium. Strict censorships are prevailing in all such countries. Internet can be considered as a democratic medium over which no physical control is possible and many people believe that it can be used as a weapon for democracy. Though it is partly correct, because of the over transparency of this medium, it can be misused as well. “It is democracy that is seen to be the privilege of cyberspace, the only true form of mass communications. Internet can be regarded as any-to-any connectivity, irrespective of geographical location or cultural difference. What is ignored here is that any-to-any connectivity can only occur when the machines that define the internet are acquired. Investment in hardware is necessary in order for initiation of a new node of the international network of networks. So participation in this kind of democracy must be confined to those people who have access to the funds for purchase of computer equipment, and literacy in the technology to take an active role in information exchange. Thus, if the internet is to become a tool for community and cultural development, it seems logical that the wider community have access to the technology”. (Joanne Jacobs) The internet related democracy cannot be a successful one because of the lack of accessibility options. Though internet can reach any person anywhere in the world at any time, the person should possess the expensive hardware of internet and moreover he should be familiar with the usage of internet and World Wide Web (WWW). So internet enabled democracy can be helpful to only a particular class of people, which is against the principles of democracy. Democracy always offers equality in opportunities and living standards to all irrespective of the class, culture, race, religion or region. Even now we know that the majority of people all over the world don’t know much about computers and internet and hence the argument in favour of ‘democracy through internet’ may not withstand. Access to internet through public internet cafes is another way to solve the accessibility limitations. Governments can think about adding another entity to the service sector through the implementation of internet cafes under public sector. But even such proposals seem to be complicated because of the complex nature of internet technologies. It is not as easy as a telephone to use by the illiterate public. So the illiterate public should rely on the cafe operator for the usage of internet and he can misuse it in favour of his political ideology. “The creation of internet-oriented information collection agencies is particularly problematic, because it broadens the gap between information 'haves' and 'have-nots'. As governments rationalize their traditional information sources, arguing that materials available online should not be duplicated in inefficient bureaucracies, more users will have to enter the online arena, but at the same time, these new users will not necessarily choose to be highly motivated users of digital political process. Conversely, these new users are likely to lack literacy in the medium, and will therefore avoid political participation”. (Joanne Jacobs) Speedy communication is possible through internet; but speedy communication is not necessary in democracy. It is required in business to identify opportunities in time and to make maximum profit. Democracy cannot be considered as a business in its purest form though one can argue that most of the politicians nowadays consider it as a business. In business most of the information need to be kept as a secret, but the information from the net are always accessible to anybody. Even in democratic setup control over the information is required. Without proper control over information, no governments can function effectively. For example, it is not possible by the governments to distribute the information regarding its military forces or security forces through internet like decentralized control medium. “In terms of government-mediated democratic process, the use of internet as a means of information dissemination can only mean a reduction in civil control, and a resultant diminishing of democratic governance” (Joanne Jacobs) The internet based communication technologies provide individuals to assemble on special occasions on a common platform and to form virtual groups on common ideologies or opinion. But it raises certain challenges as well. The people are unaware about the selection of net activities to support their desired political goals. It is easy for the politicians to know the public opinions about their performances through internet opinion polls. Lot of application software is available in the market to conduct surveys to find out the public opinion. We have seen the influence of internet and web enabled technologies in the recently concluded presidential elections in United States. Weekly and monthly surveys conducted by different Media, informed the public about the current positions of the presidential candidates. In fact, immediately after every television debates between the candidates, the public were well informed about the popularity of each candidate through the opinion surveys. “The growth of internet and web technologies presents new possibilities for direct participation in the democratic process”. Webocrat, a system developed under the IST project Webocracy allows citizens to participate more actively in opinion polls, and to discuss local issues. It also enables them to access local services more easily through the internet.(Local participation for e-services) Because of the excessive amount of media like television, radio, internet etc and the large number of commercial ads forced people to consider these Medias as symbols of commercialism. Most of the Medias getting revenue through the commercial ads only and hence they are more focussed on the success of their commercial ads rather than anything else. So people will consider themselves as consumers rather than the citizen when using such Medias. It is not easy for the Medias to influence people for delivering their duties as citizen. Of course the media can influence people in their decision making process. But their bias towards some political ideologies, made it impossible for the people to take a decision by analysing information from a single media alone. “As consumption opportunities have increased, viewers and listeners, have tended to act more as ‘consumers’ rather than as ‘citizens’. Broadcasters have followed these consumer desires and prioritized popular and entertaining formats. This trend has been particularly marked in advertising funded public service broadcasting, but is not confined to it. (Public value and the BBC) The existing media system is politically biased. Neutral Medias are small in number. Democratizing of such biased media is extremely difficult because of the various political agenda they might have. Each political parties have their own television channels and internet portals to spread their ideologies. A small state in India, Kerala has around 5 television channels and lot of internet portals for each political party to execute their political manifesto. The existing press or other visual media set up cannot be used for the democratization process. “On my account, democratizing our media system will require expansion of the alternative press, a revitalization of public television, an increased role for public access television, the eventual development of a public satellite system, democratized computer networks, and oppositional cultural politics within every sphere of culture, ranging from music to visual to print culture”. (Douglas Kellner) “ Democrats who are moving into the majority in Congress — led by Ron Wyden in the Senate and Edward Markey in the House — say they plan to fight hard to pass a net neutrality bill, and we hope that they do. It is vital to preserve the Internet’s role in promoting entrepreneurship and free expression”.(Protecting Internet Democracy) Like all other medias, internet is also not free from politics. Anybody can write anything about somebody and they can post it in the internet irrespective of what exactly the truth is. The public who reads such article may not be aware of the hidden agenda in such articles because of their unawareness about the writer. So in order to strengthen democracy the internet should be free from such character assassinations or hidden agendas. It is extremely difficult to put a censorship on internet. The normal laws are found to be ineffective in the case of internet because of its global nature. “The more impossible internet output becomes to contain, the more plausible I think it is that censorship regimes will crack, even ones as massive as the Chinese firewall. This may not be democratic activism of the most visible form, but perhaps it gives more radical democratizing movements a chance to succeed”. (Internet Weakens Democracy?) Even in the wealthiest country like United States, most of the people don’t have access to internet and hence the implementation of internet technologies for the development of democracy may not bring the desired result. Countries like India have a population of more than 100million people and hence enhancement of democracy through internet is not an easy task. Because of the popularity of internet among the rich and the middle class, it can be used for election funding and organizational activities. “Nationally, the Howard Dean presidential campaign pioneered the use of the Net for grassroots campaigning, involving ordinary people in the election process. The Net proved to be an effective tool for organization and fundraising. However, this campaign didn't quite reach critical mass, perhaps because there weren't enough Americans with high-speed Internet connections at the time.” (Commentary: Internet can strengthen democracy) Conclusion “The Internet is above all a decentralized communication system. Like the telephone network, anyone hooked up to the Internet may initiate a call, send a message that he or she has composed, and may do so in the manner of the broadcast system, that is to say, may send a message to many receivers, and do this either in "real time" or as stored data or both”(Mark Poster) Because of the lack of control, the internet can be misused by anyone who have basic computer knowledge. It is not easy to safeguard the information on internet. Even the topmost secret sites and information were hacked by intruders. Nobody can assure you about the secrecy of information on internet. Even the secret codes and credit card details were hacked by internet robbers. The usage of internet for the enhancement of democracy is not applicable because of the possible misuse of the information. The core of democracy, Legislative, Judicial and Executive power of the people cannot be implemented through internet because of the possible threats from hackers. The basic needs like intellectual power, wisdom etc. cannot be preserved by the use of internet. Even the democratic principles need certain degree of protection and internet can never offer such protection because of the lack of control of its data or decentralization of control. Like we have seen in other Medias, the internet communication is also not free from prejudice and biasing. One can easily intrude in to opposite camps through internet and can cause enough damage to the competitor without having much trouble. So net based democracy and its enhancements are practically not good for the strengthening of democratic principles. We know the constructive and destructive nature of nuclear energy. It can be used as an excellent source of energy and at the same time can be misused for making weapons for mass destruction also. Same way internet can be used as an excellent medium for the growth of the world in many ways and at the same time it can be misused for personal or political agendas as well. References 1. Joanne Jacobs – Democracy and the Internet – Retrieved on 01/01/2009 http://www.abc.net.au/ola/citizen/interdemoc/democ.htm 2. Local participation for e-services - Retrieved on 01/01/2009 http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/activities/policy_link/documents/factsheets/egov_webocracy.pdf 3. Mark Poster – Cyber Democracy: Internet and the Public Sphere- Retrieved on 01/01/2009 http://www.humanities.uci.edu/mposter/writings/democ.html 4. Public value and the BBC - Retrieved on 01/01/2009 http://www.theworkfoundation.com/assets/docs/publications/174_publicvalue_bbc.pdf 5. Douglas Kellner-  Intellectuals, the New Public Spheres, and Techno-Politics – Retrieved on 01/01/2009 http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/courses/ed253a/newDK/intell.htm 6. Protecting Internet Democracy - Retrieved on 01/01/2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/03/opinion/03wed1.html 7. Internet Weakens Democracy? - Retrieved on 01/01/2009 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/idblog/2008/12/12/internet-weakens-democracy/ 8. Commentary: Internet can strengthen democracy- Retrieved on 01/01/2009 http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/08/26/newmark.democracy/index.html Read More