The Influence of The Web on Politics and Civic Society - Literature review Example

The Influence of the Web on Politics and Civic Society The rapid growth in information technology has left an indelible impact in today’s day-to-day life and politics, and the civil society is no exception. In the twenty-first century, civil societies heavily rely on the internet and modern communication technology for their basic operations. The impact is even more profound in countries with well-developed broadcast media where civic dialogues can bubble and be guaranteed confidentiality (Chadwick & Howard, 2009). Technology has given citizens a platform, though which they can converse about topics of concern, and people can share their democratic sentiments. This has led to the creation of virtual societies online where internet users can share socially about their real lives (Romm-Livermore, 2012). Individuals who share core values and volunteer to organize political and economic activities of the group form these communities. The impact is felt more during the electioneering period. Use of the internet helps aspirants of various posts to share diverse perspectives and disseminate them to reach a large, more diverse, audience. Though an effective way of carrying out campaigns, it may trigger wrangles online where people tend to attack their opponents, and this may lead to chaos from these conversations. Civil societies use the web as a logistical tool for communication and organization of their operations (Anderson & Cornfield, 2003). The cyberspace is the platform where civil societies can challenge the government’s administration. Using the web to address issues that civil societies wish to see addressed may incite people leading to demonstrations and unruliness. At times, the issue may be exaggerated or may not be a genuine concern leading to unnecessary attention (Romm-Livermore, 2012). As much as the internet has many pros compared to cons the few cons that come with it are momentous especially if they aren’t handled appropriately, and on time. In countries where the opposition is restricted, the internet comes in handy as the prominent mode of action. On online platforms, the opposition to government can have free speech. They can have online chat rooms and online bulletin boards where the opposition leaders can conduct their business. The web has helped in broadening the citizen’s news diet through social media such as twitter and Facebook. This has brought the era where traditional methods of getting information are being dropped and people choose to the type of news they get and choose their entertainment (McIntyre, 2005). The people can get the information from the entire world. Therefore, they are conscious of what is happening globally. People can keep in touch with their family and friends, and at the same time monitor their state. This helps the people to keep in touch and eases communication for them. The web is very instrumental in the change of the regime. Urban dwellers, the youth and the elites are very instrumental in making the shift from authoritarian governance to democratic and more transparent leadership. Elections, which are sensitive topics among the youth, are very instrumental since they bring about information infrastructure by employing digital media. This enables the youth who are more affected by the rapid growth of the technology to learn and gather knowledge by being involved in the building of information infrastructure. Prior to the twenty-first century, when the internet was not so popular, the youth were left out in politics due to little exposure (Parmelee & Bichard, 2012). In the twenty-first century, the great interest of youths in the internet leaves them no option but to be involved in political and civic issues. This enables the youth to have their independent opinions about political issues. This provokes them to research how certain things are done and may latter push them to see certain things done better; leading to an improvement in governance. A recently carried out research showed that spending a lot of time online promotes interaction in the society. It found that interest driven online communities lead to more charity and volunteer to community work. The internet can serve as an effective platform for online and offline political and civic engagement in the communities affair (Kamalipour, 2010). As much of the internet is a ‘youth thing’, a misconception needs to be dropped since not all the youth are internet natives. A good number of youths cannot access to the internet, these individuals live in marginalized areas where accessing the internet is a challenge; this should be taken to consideration by the states corporate investors (Kalathil & Boas, 2003). There should be measures to ensure that people in marginalized areas are not left out in political and civic activities in the nation. The internet reduces the cost of participation in civic and political affairs. It decreases the barriers of participation by giving people the luxury of participation in absentia. Elections recently held at Malaysia show that the candidates who were active in online blogging and active on social media were likely to garner more votes compared to those who opted to invest in other forms of campaign (Hendricks & Kaid, 2010). In many countries, modern technology is rapidly eroding traditional methods used in politics. Citizens can exercise their rights and get justice much faster, which is a positive thing since justice delayed is justice denied. It is possible for citizens to document the infringement of their rights from their mobile phones. Cases of corruption can be reported to an anticorruption body, and the cases handled immediately (Oates, 2008). The employment of technology on such honest ventures is in the best of interests of the nation. The deep communication infrastructure will leave a long lasting mark where the citizens generate political content and at the same time consume information from other people. Internet impact on civil and political activities is so dynamic and there has to there has to be parameters to make sure that the involvement is not blown out of proportion. Chronic issues with digital media include spread of misinformation, insecurity on networks causing an alarm about the confidentiality of information, ethics, personal responsibility and relational anonymity between individuals who meet online (Ducke, 2007). The digital media have altered the mode of interaction and participation, which consequently has economic and learning repercussions. The question of what is good of the society seems too obvious, but it will only remain so if absolute control measures are adopted. The impact of the internet goes further as it affects the life of individual and ultimately the society (Cavatorta, 2013). This is so because the individuals who spend more time on their computers and the internet tend to spend very little time socializing with peers or family leaving them depressed and lonely. The individuals may actually be able to communicate with people on the internet from geographically distant areas thus bridging the geographical divide between them. Personal interaction is important since the internet only creates a virtual reality that is ultimately isolating. Interacting via the communication infrastructure such as the E-mail may help in keeping in touch though communicating via the phone would a better way compared to using the e-mail. This, however, is still not as efficient as one on one conversation since persons who are in the same environment tend to understand a person’s situation (Deibert, 2008). People communicating over the internet may not get the situation or the context of the conversation, making the conversation difficult. However, in the case of geographical distance the electronic means of conversing are better than having no conversation. The efficiency of emailing to friends and family at long distances is more effective and economical than calling them. People seem to be absorbed by their personal computers, mobile phones, and tablets forgetting that it is possible to have a real social life though they also have their shortcomings. The diversity of people also comes to action, some people are social and interactive and are excited by meeting new people while others are reserved and tend keep it to themselves. According to Ducke, reserved persons, the individuals are in a better position meeting people online and may be later on meet them in real life (2007). The ability of creating online communities has not been used for good as it has been abused through the creation of creating militia groups and hate groups. This derails any efforts being put in place by government in trying to fight militias and terror groups. The ability of terrorists having the same exposure as everyone puts innocent of lives at risk (Hendricks & Kaid, 2010). The terrorists enjoy the same priorities that come with the adoption of internet infrastructure as the administration hence making it difficult for the government to keep up with terrorist activities online. The threat of cyber-attacks by is also a concern especially in countries where terrorism is more profound. Cavatorta concedes that terrorists may impersonate respectable and iconic persons or online accounts to which have great following online to misinform their followers or cause terror (2013). Therefore, it is the responsibility of the state to work round the clock to see to it that its citizens are safe. The people are also charged with the sole responsibility of watching themselves while on the internet. The internet has pressing issues when it comes to matters ethics. Firstly, one has to be conscious of their language in the content they upload on the internet. A person should not use abusive language or upload content that is no ethically unfit to post online (Ducke, 2007). It’s unethical for one hides their true identity and faking their identity through the impersonation of others for personal gain. Using the internet helps people to interact with people from other countries online. This helps in increasing the knowledge of the people by learning other people’s cultures (Kamalipour, 2010). High internet users such as Australian are experiencing the first some challenges, which are bound to face to the rest countries as they continue adopting intense use of the internet they should therefore strategize in advance on ways of handling such challenges rather than be hit unaware. References Anderson, D., & Cornfield, M. (2003). The civic web. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield. Cavatorta, F. (2013). Civil society activism under authoritarian rule. London: Routledge. Chadwick, A., & Howard, P. (2009). Routledge handbook of Internet politics. London: Routledge. Deibert, R. (2008). Access denied. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Ducke, I. (2007). Civil society and the internet in Japan. London: Routledge. Hendricks, J., & Kaid, L. (2010). Techno politics in presidential campaigning. New York: Routledge. Kalathil, S., & Boas, T. (2003). Open networks, closed regimes. Washington, D.C.: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Kamalipour, Y. (2010). Media, power, and politics in the digital age. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers. McIntyre, M. (2005). Secrets to winning at office politics. New York: St. Martins Griffin. Oates, S. (2008). Introduction to media and politics. London: SAGE. Parmelee, J., & Bichard, S. (2012). Politics and the Twitter revolution. Lanham, Md.: Lexington Books. Romm-Livermore, C. (2012). E-politics and organizational implications of the Internet. Hershey, PA: Information Science Reference. Read More