Untitled - socium.ge

Untitled - socium.ge Untitled - socium.ge

10.07.2015 Views

The Internet and the political process 365of political actors is broadened, new avenues of collective mobilization mayappear, and a different format of debate may take place, transforming the politicalscene that had been framed by the one-way communication systems of themass media era. This is the hypothesis that we will try to explore in this chapter,grounded on observation of political trends and on available literature onthe topic.In view of the analytical purpose of our study, we will be focusing only onthe United States and on the United Kingdom (the societies in which moststudies on the matter are available) in the hope that our approach can beusefully applied to other contexts. As an additional caveat, we do not implythat all politics can be reduced to formal politics. For us, politics includes allsocial processes that relate to the exercise of power relationships in society,regardless of their institutional and organizational context. Formal politicsrefers to the processes of representation, deliberation, and decision-making inthe constitutionally designated institutions of political authority. We also focuson the process of accessing institutions of governance (leaving aside issues ofso-called e-government); that is, the management of public administration andthe practice of government under the networked paradigm. Our concern in thischapter is to investigate the emerging interaction between people and democracyin the process of political representation in the new form of networkedpublic space constituted by the Internet.THE USES OF THE INTERNET IN THE POLITICALPROCESSWell into the twenty-first century, the Internet is no longer an exotic politicalmedium. The first thing most political candidates do upon declaring theircandidacy is to set up a website. Parliaments and government agencies aroundthe world are gradually moving their activities online. However, despite thisexpansion of online political communication, there has been little real changein the structure and conduct of formal politics. Expectations of increaseddeliberation and interaction between citizens and politicians have not beenmet, as the Internet has been used largely to facilitate a one-way flow of informationfrom politicians to the public (Norris, 2002; The Economist, 2003;Johnson, 2003; Levine, 2003; Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2003;Ward et al., 2003).Like the traditional media, the Internet is most valued by politicians as atool for disseminating information to the media and the public at large,although it is also uniquely effective in mobilizing voters and enhancing interaction.Even so, Internet users are often unable to find the kind of politicalinformation they want, such as comparative information, explanation of voting

366 Araba Sey and Manuel Castellsrecords, and campaign finance (Browning, 2001; Pew Internet and AmericanLife Project, 2003). Available information may be superficial (Levine, 2003),non-analytical (Wolfensberger, 2002), or, in some cases, high quality but notuser friendly (Coleman, 1999). Studies of online political campaigns in the USand UK conclude that most campaigns use the Internet as an “electronicbrochure” (Kamarck, 2002: 89).Despite indications of the Internet’s effectiveness in mobilizing voters (forexample, Jesse Ventura’s success in the 1998 Minnesota gubernatorial election),by 2002 there was still limited mobilization online. Internet users weremore energized by websites offering political humor than by those of officialcampaigns (Coleman, 2001; Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2003).In the UK, only 38 percent of political sites allowed visitors to join up online,and this usually involved using off-line methods such as mailing downloadedapplications (Ward et al., 2003).Politicians are also generally reluctant to engage actively with their publicson- or off-line (Browning, 2001; Gibson et al., 2003; Levine, 2003). For example,less than a third of UK political sites examined by Ward and co-workers(2003) had interactive capabilities, and during the 2002 US elections, Internetportals such as Yahoo!, AOL, and MSN provided more tools for analysis andinteraction than campaign sites did (Pew Internet and American Life Project,2003). Where politicians have tried to interact with Internet users, the opennessof such forums is questionable (Gibson et al., 2003). Although closure ofthe US House and Senate offices after the September 11 attacks spurred a morecentral role for the Internet in Congress, members still have an ambivalent attitudetoward the medium (Wolfensberger, 2002). Overall, widespread acceptanceof the Internet as a tool for political campaigns and programs has nottranslated into a more open and participatory political process.THE POLITICAL LIMITS OF INTERNET-BASED POLITICSThe limited exploitation of the democratic capabilities of the Internet by politicianscan be attributed to perceptions of the Internet or to the characteristics,preferences, and motivations of politicians. Generally speaking, few politicianssee the Internet as a force to be reckoned with. They perceive the Internetas “little more than a big electronic auditorium where millions of peoplegather to spout off much like high-school kids in a civics class – but nonethelesshave little actual impact on the crafting of policies that govern them”(Browning, 2001: 13), thus underestimating the democratizing potential of themedium.On the flipside of this is a general distrust of public engagement in politics.Increasing use of direct political methods, such as protest politics, direct

The Internet and the political process 365of political actors is broadened, new avenues of collective mobilization mayappear, and a different format of debate may take place, transforming the politicalscene that had been framed by the one-way communication systems of themass media era. This is the hypothesis that we will try to explore in this chapter,grounded on observation of political trends and on available literature onthe topic.In view of the analytical purpose of our study, we will be focusing only onthe United States and on the United Kingdom (the societies in which moststudies on the matter are available) in the hope that our approach can beusefully applied to other contexts. As an additional caveat, we do not implythat all politics can be reduced to formal politics. For us, politics includes allsocial processes that relate to the exercise of power relationships in society,regardless of their institutional and organizational context. Formal politicsrefers to the processes of representation, deliberation, and decision-making inthe constitutionally designated institutions of political authority. We also focuson the process of accessing institutions of governance (leaving aside issues ofso-called e-government); that is, the mana<strong>ge</strong>ment of public administration andthe practice of government under the networked paradigm. Our concern in thischapter is to investigate the emerging interaction between people and democracyin the process of political representation in the new form of networkedpublic space constituted by the Internet.THE USES OF THE INTERNET IN THE POLITICALPROCESSWell into the twenty-first century, the Internet is no lon<strong>ge</strong>r an exotic politicalmedium. The first thing most political candidates do upon declaring theircandidacy is to set up a website. Parliaments and government a<strong>ge</strong>ncies aroundthe world are gradually moving their activities online. However, despite thisexpansion of online political communication, there has been little real chan<strong>ge</strong>in the structure and conduct of formal politics. Expectations of increaseddeliberation and interaction between citizens and politicians have not beenmet, as the Internet has been used lar<strong>ge</strong>ly to facilitate a one-way flow of informationfrom politicians to the public (Norris, 2002; The Economist, 2003;Johnson, 2003; Levine, 2003; Pew Internet and American Life Project, 2003;Ward et al., 2003).Like the traditional media, the Internet is most valued by politicians as atool for disseminating information to the media and the public at lar<strong>ge</strong>,although it is also uniquely effective in mobilizing voters and enhancing interaction.Even so, Internet users are often unable to find the kind of politicalinformation they want, such as comparative information, explanation of voting

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!