What are the uses/limits of the internet in terms of politics and/or democracy? Should we rethink the nature of the political? What happens to the nation/state in the age of networks that have the potential to span the whole planet? What has happened to the idea of "community" in the age of networked digital media? Discuss with an example.
The internet in terms of democracy is endless in the ways it can be used, but there are also limitations such as censorship and the prospect of a ‘clean feed’. In a lot of ways having this newly suggested idea of a ‘clean feed’, which is an idea to control adult and explicit material on the internet, as well as having censorship, goes against a lot of what democracy represents. Taking away peoples ability to choose what they want to see on the internet or not representing the majority opinion, limits the idea of democracy.
“Deliberation and discussion are key attributes of democracy; maybe talk is the most important element of democratic activity. The ability to convince and the willingness to be convinced are what provide the give and take that makes democracy something for all citizens. And that requires access to free speech” (1).
Unfortunately, in Australia we don’t have the constitutional right to free speech. Recently the High Court found that free political expression was implied by the constitution. “We could see free speech as self-correcting mechanism - in using free speech people make democracy happen” (1). If the internet was censored it would completely change cyberspace and people in general. The internet lets people express how they feel and who they are without the looming concern that it would be altered, controlled or censored.
However, there is the other point of view of protecting people from illegal and illicit material on the internet as there is a large amount of it. There are measures in place to help with this and censoring the entire internet seems extreme and will probably go against the majority, which again goes against democracy. There is a campaign started in Australia with the message of “No clean feed: Stop internet censorship in Australia” (10).
With the constant growth of the internet it seems like nearly everything you could imagine is now online, this includes politics. Some people believe that politics should not rely and be on the internet as much as it is. So this poses the question of whether we should rethink the nature of politics on the internet.
“Political parties, other groups and individuals are increasingly using the Internet to spread their messages by inter alia, establishing 'Web' pages, which provide a variety of facilities such as policy documents, interactive 'chat' facilities and links to other sites” (2).
Two terms associated with internet politics are cyberpolitics and eDemocracy. By cyberpolitics “we mean the politics of the internet that exists predominantly on the internet” and by eDemocracy we are referring to “the internet's intervention in and contribution to real world politics that exists predominantly off the internet” (1).
“The discussion of the political impact of the Internet has focussed on a number of issues: access, technological determinism, encryption, commodification, intellectual property, the public sphere, decentralization, anarchy, gender and ethnicity” (3).
In terms of rethinking the nature of the political there are many sides to consider. In a lot of ways it is a good thing. There is a larger network of people, therefore more people are getting involved and interested and they are getting the information they need. They also, once again, have the power of free speech on the internet to express their viewpoint.
“Is the Internet poised to replace television as the central means of political communication? Will the advent of computer communication create a new era of citizen activism? Will the Internet ultimately lend itself more to political accountability and access or to exclusion and extremism? Is cyberspace truly the domain of the ideological right?” (4)
In the end this political nature has certainly had a lot of benefits and helped to expand politics but there are also concerns for the future. With the constant evolvement of cyberpolitics what happens to those people who don’t have internet access. There are also issues of security, with altering and deleting material as well as offering anonymity, which allows people not to take any responsibility.
This also brings about the question of what happens to the nation/state in the age of networks that have the potential to span the whole planet.
With networks now being able to be used all around the world it influences our nation and others in many ways. “The internet is often seen as a significant contributor to the globalization of culture and the economy. It is also seen as an inherently international medium, unimpeded by national borders and removed from the jurisdiction of the nation-state” (5).
With the internet there is the ability for all nations to come together with no barriers separating them. Everyone has the right to express themselves how they want and have their say. This networking breaks down a lot of barriers between people all around the world. Through social networking such as Myspace, Twitter and Facebook there is also communication between people as well as the ability to quickly get updates from a lot of prominent people.
The idea of community has also changed in the age of networked digital media. People are building relationships through these networks. As mentioned the use of social networking sites is extremely popular and also the use of instant messaging not only on the computer but now also on cell phones. There was also a recent study showing that up to 97 per cent of Australians aged 16-17 use at least one social networking site (11).
“Social network sites like MySpace and Facebook serve as “networked publics.” As with unmediated publics like parks and malls, youth use networked publics to gather, socialize with their peers, and make sense of and help build the culture around them” (6).
Community sites are one of the fastest growing categories of Web-sites (7).
Online virtual communities have existed on the Internet for almost a quarter of a century and are consistently growing. These communities offer people a chance to escape their real life and be in a community with people and ideas that they connect with.
Understanding virtual communities are also of importance to organizations that want to tap into their vast information and revenue growing potential. As an example, Johnson & Johnson marketed acne products by means of online communities of teenage girls (8). There is even a virtual community for homeless people (9).
In conclusion, community has expanded through networked media, and cyberspace has helped to allow people a place to express who they are and helped with political opinions and campaigning. Although the clean feed is a consideration, it would alter these communities and restricts people in a democratic society.
Bibliography
(1) - Lecture 8 - Political Possibilities (by Stephen Stockwell), accessed on 16/10/09 https://learning.secure.griffith.edu.au/webapps/portal/frameset.jsp?tab=courses&url=/bin/common/course.pl?course_id=_71280_1&frame=top
(2) – Paula Williams, 1998, How the Internet is being used by political organisations, accessed on 17/10/09 http://www.aph.gov.au/library/Pubs/rp/1997-98/98rp11.htm
(3) Mark Poster, 1995, CyberDemocracy: Internet and the Public Sphere, Accessed on 17/10/09
http://www.hnet.uci.edu/mposter/writings/democ.html
(4) Kevin A. Hill, John E. Hughes, 1998, Cyberpolitics: Citizen Activism in the Age of the Internet, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. Accessed on 15/10/09
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=551242
(5) Alexander Halavais, 2000, New Media & Society, Vol. 2, No. 1, 7-28, Accessed on 15/10/09
http://nms.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/2/1/7
(6) Danah Boyd, 2008, Youth Identity, and Digital Media, pgs. 119 – 142, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Accessed on 19/10/09
http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/abs/10.1162/dmal.9780262524834.119
(7) Peterson, 1999, Some places to go when you want to feel right at home: Communities
focus on people who need people. The Wall Street Journal, Accessed on 20/10/09
(8) Kenny, D and Marshall, J.F. 2000, Contextual marketing: The real business of the Internet, Harvard Bussiness Review, pgs 119 -125, Accessed on 20/10/09
(9) Horowitz, D, 1997, Homeless can connect on own Web site, The San Francisco Examiner, Accessed on 17/10/09
(10)
Electronic Frontiers Australia, 2009, No Clean Feed: Stop Internet Censorship in Australia, Accessed on 16/10/09
(11)
ABC, 2009, The dangers of social networking, Accessed on 21/10/09
