Idea of Digital Democracy - Report Example

Name: Tutor: Title: Digital Democracy Course: Date: Introduction Today, it is strongly perceived that the Internet is the new electronic basis of democracy. This is because of the massive spread and easily accessible information that is acquired via the Internet as a World Wide networking hub. Before, the adoption of mass media technologies such as the printing press, there was difficulties in communicating ideas. Political conversations, for example, were the highly affected purview of the elite. However, advent of the printing press has enabled the political conversations to reach a mass audience notwithstanding the various obstacles of government opposition, geographical locations and levels of illiteracy. Thus, improvements in civic engagement and participation as well as freedom of speech have been encouraged (). Digital democracy is considered as the application of information and communication technology (ICT) and computer-mediated communication (CMC) in different types of media such as the Internet, digital telephony and interactive broadcasting purposely to promote political democracy (Hacker & Dijik 2000). This report focuses on the idea of ‘digital democracy’ as a major contributing factor to the ant-globalization movement particularly in the early 21st century. This will also involve a critical analysis of how digital democracy has facilitated the past years’ revolutions that have taken place across the Middle East. Literature Review It has been observed that since the mid 1990s, the massive growth of the Internet has contributed to more debates about the potential consequences of using this new media in the political world (Castells 2002). However, a number of researchers of the digital democracy appear to be subtle about the actual impact of the evolution because they are unable to determine whether if it will positively or negatively result in a radically transformed democracy. Although the political insiders and outsiders can utilize the new information and communication technologies, it has been argued that the balance of power as well as the current political structure may not change. Further research reveals that individuals who are politically active in using the Internet were once ‘political junkies’ (Johnson & Kaye 1999; Norris 2002). Social-movement observers strongly support the idea that the new media offer more opportunities for taking an international collective action. However, they are doubtful if new media will help to develop stable and long-lasting movements given today’s dynamic information age. Van Aelst and Stefaan (2002) in their article entitled “” focused on current and potential impacts of new media on the success of new anti-globalization protests as well as the conceivable information of new social movement. The authors claim that their objective is not to determine whether the ant-globalization coalition is a reliable movement or a temporary expression of dissatisfaction with both global economic and political governance. Therefore, they confined their analysis on websites and the contribution of the Internet on social movement that is considered as a net of organizations that is formed based on a shared collective identity, mobilizing people to join so as to achieve social or political goals. Ayres (2001) states that it irrelevant to argue that anti-globalization protesters are against 'globalization' as such. This would mean that they do not form a global network of organizations, and thus do not use the Inter net as a tool to communicate their needs globally. Therefore, Ayres emphasizes that it is through the neo-liberal way that the globalization is actually shaped and its negative effects on human beings as well as the environment that are challenged (Ayres 2001). In the public sphere, different people enjoy their freedom of expression because of the rational deliberation as well as equal opportunities to available for them to share their viewpoints (Bohman 2004 and Garnham 2000). From the digital divide and political control point of view, it has been argued that even though the Internet is not an extension of the public sphere, it still creates positive effects to the political participation (Papacharissi 2002 and Cornfield 2000). Smith et al. (2009) stated that in the US, advantaged people are seen as the most active in politics, an imbalance that is common in online activism. According to Clay Shirky (2008) digital tools enhance democracy and social tools are significantly improving people’s ability to share, cooperate and work together in the same way everyone who adopts the tools contributes to an epochal change. In his book entitled “Networks of Outrage and Hope-Social Movements via the Internet Age in: Opening networking minds, creating of meaning and contesting for power,” Castells Manuel (2012) states that no one could believe in a world full of economic distress, personal hopelessness, cultural worthlessness and political cynicism that dictatorships would be suddenly overthrown with bare hands of the victimized people. Initially, there was no trust as politicians could be seen as corrupt and liars, media were not liable and governments were denounced. Although trust is considered as a crucial attribute that glues together society, markets and institutions, it had vanished causing everything to standstill. As a result, the social contract dissolved and individuals disappeared to form defensive groups who fought for survival. Therefore, people joined to share their lives with nature and establish new forms of being themselves by connecting with real concerns of individuals who shared the real human experience after their reclamation. This movement was started on the Internet social networks because they were considered as spaces of autonomy that worked beyond the control of the governments as well as corporations that had become agents to monopolize the communication channels as basis of their power. The safety of cyberspace and hope in such a free space helped people to share their sorrows and overcome fear to connect to each other and envision projects from different sources of being to developing networks (Castells 2012). The major cause of multifaceted rebellion was the humiliation that was provoked by cynicism and increased arrogance of individuals in power that made the victimized people to join and turn their fear into outrage and hope for respected humanity. People had been subjected to poverty, economic crisis and lack of democracy. However, after the networked social movements had first spread in Arab world, it was violently confronted by Arab dictatorships. Other movements were against the poor management of economic crisis particularly in Europe and the U.S by governments who supported the financial elites that were held responsible for the crisis against the needs of their citizens. In general, the social movements did not value the political parties or recognize any leadership did not trust the media and could not accept any formal organization but relying on the Internet as well as local assemblies to participate in collective debate and in their decision-making processes (Castells 2012). In order to promote a detailed understanding of the movements, Castells based his analysis of opening networking minds, establishing meaning and contesting for power on the theory power that he presented in his book communication power (2009). He argued that power relationships are constitutively built in society because people who exercise power will often construct the institutions of their society by focusing on their values and interests. The author emphasizes that power is exercised through coercion such as monopoly of violence, determining the legislations by controlling the state and constructing meaning in people’s minds through symbolic manipulation. This clearly shows that power relations are built in various institutions of society, in particular the states. However, Castells notes that since societies have become contradictory and conflictive, exercising power will result in counter-power which he perceives as the capacity or efforts of the social actors to challenge the power imposed in the institutions society as a way to claim respect for their values and interests. The author observes that coercion and intimidation that are based on the monopoly of the state’s capacity to involve in violence are crucial mechanisms for recognizing the will of people in control of societal institutions. On the other hand, Castells states that construction of meaning in the minds of people is more or less decisive and stable way of exercising power. This means understanding the manner in which people look at the fate of their institutions, norms and values through which societies are organized and developed (Castells 2012). According to Castells, a society that is perceived as a network society, power must be exercised multi-dimensionally and organized around the networks that are programmed in different domains of human activity based on the interests and values of the empowered actors. The author examines that networks of power is exercised by influencing the minds of people predominantly and not solely by use of multimedia networks or mass communication. Therefore, communication networks have become decisive basis for power-making. However, the major challenge of a social movement begins with the change of emotion into action. From the perspective of effective intelligence, Castells examines that fear as a negative effect and enthusiasm as a positive effect are the key emotions to social mobilization and political behavior. Thus, positive and negative effects are related to two other major motivational systems that are associated with human evolution. The approach system that focus on goal-seeking behaviors that influence individuals to reward experiences and avoidance where it is believed that for enthusiasm to occur and hope to arise, people have to overcome their negative emotion that is caused by avoidance motivational system (Castells 2012). Critical Reflection Based on the above literature discussions, it is quite clear that people’s views of the media form a significant component of the checks and balances that help to understand a modern democracy. The suggested theoretical framework by Van Aelst and Stefaan of the three dimensions of social movement is a true reflection on the major conditions that lead to movement formation. This implies that social movement should be formed as a network of different organizations and actual mobilization of people, who have a shared definition of a problem and collective identity. From Castells’s arguments, it can be learnt that social movements have resulted in new values and goals upon which various institutions of society are transformed to promote the values and create new norms of organizing the social life. Both Van Aelst and Stefaan and Castells main objective was to inform the readers that the Internet has enabled the social movements to exercise counter-power reflected in their confidence to construct themselves through autonomous communication that is free from the control of institutional power. Therefore, it is apparent that digital social networks create the possibility for massive and unfettered deliberation that is achieved through coordination of actions. Basically, the autonomy of communication enhanced by use of networked or new public space between the digital space and urban space is the fundamental nature of social movements. This implies that the availability of autonomous communication is what drives the movement to formed as well as relate to the entire society beyond the institutional power over the communication power. It is important to note that the massive use of the Internet has to a larger extent enabled oppressed societies to become contradictory and conflictive, resulting in counter-power. Therefore, it is through the capacity of these social actors that the power imposed in the institutions society is challenged as a way to claim recognition and respect for their values and interests. Mostly, social movements are formed as a result of the fundamental injustices that arise in societies and thus causing the relentless confrontation by groups of people who demonstrate their human aspirations of justice. This clearly explains why power relationships are constitutively built in society. Therefore, Castells’ research truly confirms that people who exercise power will often construct the institutions of their society by determining whether if or not their values and interests are recognized and respected in their societies. Research Scope Since most of the researchers of the digital democracy are still subtle about the actual impact of the social movements, further research would help to determine whether if the movements will positively or negatively result in a radically transformed democracy. Given the dynamic nature of today’s technology and information age, it would be important to make continuous investigations about the effects of social movements. This will help to end the doubtful state of social-movement observers on whether if the new media will contribute to development of stable and long-lasting movements. Bibliography Ayres, J.M., 2001, 'Transnational political processes and debate against the global economy', Mobilization, 6 (4), 55-68. Bohman, J., 2004, Expanding dialogue through the Internet as the public sphere and prospects for transnational democracy, Blackwell Publishing, Oxford. Castells, M., 2012, Networks of Outrage and Hope: The Social Movements in the Internet Age, Cambridge, Polity Press, Opening the ‘Networking Minds, Creating Meaning, Contesting for Power’, pp. 1-19. Cornfield, M., 2000, “The Internet and Democratic Participation,” National Civic Review, 89(3), 235-242. Garnham, N., 2000, The Media and the Public Sphere. In Calhoun, C. (ed.) Habermas and the Public Sphere, MIT Press, Cambridge, p. 359-376. Hacker, K & van Dijk, J., 2000, Digital Democracy: Issues of Theory and Practice, Sage Publications, London. Johnson, T & Kaye, B., 2000, Democracy's rebirth or demise? How does the Internet influence political attitudes? in D. Schultz (ed.) The Media, Politics and Popular Culture, Peter Lang, New York, pp. 209-28. Norris, P., 2002, Democratic Phoenix: The Political Activism Worldwide, Cambridge University Press. New York. Papacharissi, Z., 2002, The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere, New Media and Society, 4 (1), 9-27. Smith, A, Schlozman, K.L, Verba, S & Brady, H., 2009, The Internet and Civic Engagement. Retrieved September 21, 2013 from,   Shirky, C., 2008, The Power of organizing without organizations, Penguin, New York Van Aelst, P & Stefaan, W., 2002, ‘New Media or New Movements? Understanding the role of the Internet in Shaping the “Anti-­‐Globalization” Movement’, Information, Communication & Society, 5(2), 465-­‐493. Read More