The Internet as Encouraging and Improving Democratic Debate - Case Study Example

Internet and Democracy Name Course Lecture Date Introduction The Internet as a communication channel has more than 600 million users. With this potential to reach millions, the Internet has been viewed as a platform that can enhance democratic debate. In this paper the extent of the Internet’s influence opening up of democratic debate. This paper discusses how the Internet is encouraging and improving democratic debate in modern society. It starts by examining how the Internet is allowing minor parties to participate in political debate typically dominated by their major allies. Secondly, it discusses how the Internet is allowing more people to break into Democratic debates in their countries and communities. Thirdly, it analyzes how trends of Microblogging and citizenship journalism are influencing the democratization process. Improving access for Minor parties on Democratic debates The Internet allows small parties to have equal representation with dominant major parties in political debate. According to Gibson and Ward (2000), the Internet is a channel that exposes smaller parties and allows them to challenge their major opponents in political debates. For example, fringe parties in Britain have an equal standing with Labour and the conservative party in online forums. The internet makes this possible as anybody can express their political opinion regardless of their political status. In effect, the Internet has empowered minor parties to be able to challenge the policies and decisions of major parties. However, cyber-pessimists are concerned that increasing the access of political parties to citizens does not necessarily lead to more democracy. Zhao (2014) argues that parties whether major or small will attempt to manipulate the online debate. Mostly they use the Internet as a site of disseminating policy instead of a forum where productive political debate can take place. In effect, online debates influenced by parties only serve the interest of the parties. Manipulative schemes used by political parties include simulating the future so that citizens can agree to the investment of public funds in realizing the envisioned dream. Bringing more people into the debate In addition, the Internet also brings more people into the democratic debate by merely providing access. However, it should be noted that this access has been limited by the problem of access. According to Zhao (2014), access to political debate is only restricted to people of higher social economic status, higher educational attainment and mostly those in urban areas. In most parts of the world, only the rich, young and educated have access to the Internet. On the other hand, access as a way of bringing more people into the political debate is limited to the question of Internet censorship. According to Zhang (2010), governments decide to censor the Internet in an effort to limit political debate within their spheres of influence. Governments that are afraid of losing their grip on power fear opening up political space in their country. The Chinese government is a good example of a government that fears the enhanced political debate brought about by the Internet. In a bid to stifle political debate, the government of China has a web filtering mechanism referred to as the Great Firewall of China (Lee and Liu 2012). The system filters Internet communication on the Chinese Internet and their communication with the outside world. For example, the firewall can filter political messages if they contain certain keywords Lee and Liu 2012). While Internet communication can be a tool to encourage political debate, its control stifles political expression. In China, bloggers confine their online conversations to other aspects of life rather than politics. Zhao (2014) argues that for the Internet to enhance political debate, it must be free of censorship. According to Zhang (2010), the Great Firewall amounts to political manipulation of the nation’s citizens, which ensures they do not have diverse political views opposed to their government. Thus, some believe the Internet is enhancing political debate for a privileged majority who have access and are not subject to Internet censorship (Zhang 2010). However, cyber-optimists argue that the Internet allows for political debate and expression even in censored countries. In addition, the Internet is a valuable medium for promoting democratic ideals during electoral periods. Zhao (2014) illustrates how the Internet has been used to promote responsible decision making at election time. It has also been used as mobilization media during election Campaigns. According to Dugan (2012), as many as sixty-six percent of social media users have been engaged in activities to raise political awareness online. Some join campaigns to mobilize voters or comment on political issues surrounding election. Social media polling is also becoming a reference point of the possible outcomes of actual voting. Thus, the Internet is providing its users with an opportunity to shape election policy. The Internet also enables voters to directly access candidates and nominees on chat or on their social media accounts. New Apps are available where the electorate can talk to their candidates directly (Zhao, 2014). This direct contact enables voters to engage candidates about their plans for the offices they are vying for (Xenos, Vromen and Loader 2014). Barack Obama’s victory for the US presidency is credited to the Democratic Party’s strong engagement and interaction with the electorate at the grassroots level through social media. Thus, the Internet can be said to significantly influence the way elections are conducted these days. Voters are able scrutinize and criticize candidates and the electoral system by directly engaging with them. Cyber-optimists have argued that the Internet has been used as a forum to organize social and political reforms in some countries. The Arab Spring revolution is a good example of how political debate on social media can grow into a full-blown revolution (Lotan et al 2011). The Jasmine revolution used Twitter and Facebook to spread ideas of democracy and accelerate the democratic movement. Social media enabled the democratic forces defeat government propaganda that was being aired through mass media. The London riots were also incubated and organized on social media (Tonkin, Pfeiffer and Tourte 2012). In China, the Internet provides a media channel through which the totalitarian party-state can be challenged. The activities of young people online have increased hope that a democratic revolution might be on the way in China. Microblogging, and Citizen Journalism Citizens use social media sites such as Weibo, Twitter, Facebook and blogs to participate in political discussion (Bruns, 2011). Their contribution’s objective is to either directly or indirectly influence policy in their countries. Sometimes they aim to sensitize other web users about political issues. Internet communication enables an interaction and interdependence between citizens, politicians and the media which make the Internet a valuable channel of public communication. A famous Chinese blogger was able to expose cases of official corruption in China between 2004 and 2005 (Lee and Liu 2012). In so doing, the Chinese public discovered that blogs are useful channels of political participation. In a nation where freedom of expression and speech is denied, the new channels of communication provide a means to challenge the political system. The spreading participation in political discussions by citizens through social media enhances the belief that the Internet is improving citizens’ participation in democratic debate. Social media also enables citizens to participate in producing and broadcasting of political news. According to Poell and Borra (2012), bloggers and users of social media are no longer mere consumers of political reportage. Ordinary people are now more involved in political reportage and regularly produce original news items that would not have been covered by mainstream journalists. Barack Obama’s comments about small-town Americans attachment with guns was reported by a citizen journalist (Zhao 2014). Some bloggers are now recognized as members of the press corps and are significant opinion shapers in their home countries. Numerous accounts of attacks on civilians during protests have been shot by amateurs who later share them to popular video sharing sites like YouTube. Zhao (2014) argues that the participation of citizens in producing political reports and analyzing government decisions is a clear indication that the Internet is enhancing the richness of the political debate. Citizens are now able to participate in the wider dissemination and completion of information. In effect, political information spreads faster and wider and bloggers rather than journalists play a greater role in setting the news agenda. This implies that the Internet is allowing citizens to take up the role of democratization traditionally held journalists. Conclusion This paper presents undeniable evidence showing that the Internet is encouraging and enhancing democratic debate in modern society. The Internet as a means of communication provides people with more access to political discussion. This is particularly advantageous to minor political parties that can break into the policy debate much more easily. Citizens on the other hand can access electoral candidates and politicians directly through Internet media. They can be able to hold politicians to account for their actions in these online interactions. However, cyber pessimists argue that enhancement of democratic debate is only possible for people who have access to the Internet. People whose access is limited by consequences such as censorship cannot benefit from more democratic debate enhanced by the Internet. Moreover, social media has enabled voters take a more significant role in shaping election agenda. In addition, social media has been used as a platform to organize social and political revolutions like the Jasmine revolution in Tunisia. Bloggers and microbloggers have also become news producers and disseminators therefore widening participation in the democratization process. References Bruns, A 2011, News produsage in a pro-am mediasphere: why citizen journalism matters. News Online: transformations and continuities, Palgrave Macmillan, London, UK. Duggan, M 2012, Pew Internet: Politics. Pew Research Center’s Internet & American Life. Gibson, R & Ward, S 2000, British Party Activity in Cyberspace: New Media, Same Impact? Reinvigorating Democracy: British politics and the Internet, Ashgate Publishing Limited, England, UK. Lee, JA, & Liu, C 2012, Forbidden City enclosed by the great firewall: the law and power of Internet filtering in China. Forbidden City Enclosed by the Great Firewall: The Law and Power of Internet Filtering in China (March 7, 2012). Minnesota Journal of Law, Science, and Technology, 13(1). Lotan, G, Graeff, E, Ananny, M, Gaffney, D, & Pearce, I 2011, The Arab Spring| the revolutions were tweeted: Information flows during the 2011 Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions. International journal of communication, 5, 31. Poell, T, & Borra, E 2012, Twitter, YouTube, and Flickr as platforms of alternative journalism: The social media account of the 2010 Toronto G20 protests. Journalism, 13(6), 695-713. Tonkin, E, Pfeiffer, HD, & Tourte, G 2012, Twitter, information sharing and the London riots?. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 38(2), 49-57. Xenos, M., Vromen, A., & Loader, B. D. (2014). The great equalizer? Patterns of social media use and youth political engagement in three advanced democracies. Information, Communication & Society, 17(2), 151-167. Zhang, Y 2010, The right to freedom of expressions versus media censorship in China: Chinese citizens and the Internet, New York. Zhao, Y 2014, New Media and Democracy: 3 Competing Visions from Cyber-Optimism and Cyber-Pessimism. Journal of Political Sciences & Public Affairs. Read More

According to Zhang (2010), governments decide to censor the Internet in an effort to limit political debate within their spheres of influence. Governments that are afraid of losing their grip on power fear opening up political space in their country. The Chinese government is a good example of a government that fears the enhanced political debate brought about by the Internet. In a bid to stifle political debate, the government of China has a web filtering mechanism referred to as the Great Firewall of China (Lee and Liu 2012).

The system filters Internet communication on the Chinese Internet and their communication with the outside world. For example, the firewall can filter political messages if they contain certain keywords Lee and Liu 2012). While Internet communication can be a tool to encourage political debate, its control stifles political expression. In China, bloggers confine their online conversations to other aspects of life rather than politics. Zhao (2014) argues that for the Internet to enhance political debate, it must be free of censorship.

According to Zhang (2010), the Great Firewall amounts to political manipulation of the nation’s citizens, which ensures they do not have diverse political views opposed to their government. Thus, some believe the Internet is enhancing political debate for a privileged majority who have access and are not subject to Internet censorship (Zhang 2010). However, cyber-optimists argue that the Internet allows for political debate and expression even in censored countries. In addition, the Internet is a valuable medium for promoting democratic ideals during electoral periods.

Zhao (2014) illustrates how the Internet has been used to promote responsible decision making at election time. It has also been used as mobilization media during election Campaigns. According to Dugan (2012), as many as sixty-six percent of social media users have been engaged in activities to raise political awareness online. Some join campaigns to mobilize voters or comment on political issues surrounding election. Social media polling is also becoming a reference point of the possible outcomes of actual voting.

Thus, the Internet is providing its users with an opportunity to shape election policy. The Internet also enables voters to directly access candidates and nominees on chat or on their social media accounts. New Apps are available where the electorate can talk to their candidates directly (Zhao, 2014). This direct contact enables voters to engage candidates about their plans for the offices they are vying for (Xenos, Vromen and Loader 2014). Barack Obama’s victory for the US presidency is credited to the Democratic Party’s strong engagement and interaction with the electorate at the grassroots level through social media.

Thus, the Internet can be said to significantly influence the way elections are conducted these days. Voters are able scrutinize and criticize candidates and the electoral system by directly engaging with them. Cyber-optimists have argued that the Internet has been used as a forum to organize social and political reforms in some countries. The Arab Spring revolution is a good example of how political debate on social media can grow into a full-blown revolution (Lotan et al 2011). The Jasmine revolution used Twitter and Facebook to spread ideas of democracy and accelerate the democratic movement.

Social media enabled the democratic forces defeat government propaganda that was being aired through mass media. The London riots were also incubated and organized on social media (Tonkin, Pfeiffer and Tourte 2012). In China, the Internet provides a media channel through which the totalitarian party-state can be challenged. The activities of young people online have increased hope that a democratic revolution might be on the way in China. Microblogging, and Citizen Journalism Citizens use social media sites such as Weibo, Twitter, Facebook and blogs to participate in political discussion (Bruns, 2011).

Read More