Group members

 

• Julia Fr
• Amanda

   

 

 

Source:

 

Richard Davis. The Web of Politics. New York. Oxford University Press. 1999

 

 

 

 

"The Web of Politics" by Richard Davis

 

                    or   

 

Does/will/can the internet fulfill the promise of true direct democracy?

 

Davis' answer: No.

1.       The Internet will not lead to a better, more participatory democracy.

2.       The Internet will not lead to campaigns with equal chances and will therefore not lead to a different outcome of the elections.

 

 

Supporting Arguments:

ad 1: ->Comparison to Usenet

• Unrepresentativeness: limited access, socio-economic background

->Posters do not represent population, they make up a minority

•   Opinion reinforcement instead of exchange; dominance of the loudest; lack of evidence

->Users tend to join groups with similar opinions, dissenters do not dare to interfere due to fear of „flaming“

• Concerning the campaign in 1996: only illusion of interactivity; not public, controlled by candidate; no interaction between users

• Internet does not change human behavioral patterns: virtual communities have the same characteristics as real communities; more information available does not necessarily result in better informed citizens

 

 

ad 2:

•         the already existing major players dominate:

• mass media

• candidates from major parties

         -> advantaged because

- more resources

                        - incumbents

                              - more attention

• Opinion gauge, voter reinforcement, recruiting volunteers and fundraising not very successful

 

 

Conclusion:

Although the internet was hailed as “the beginnings of true direct democracy” (p.4), it does not fulfill this promise:

• „This new technology will not revolutionize who gets elected. It will change the way campaigns are run.“ (p. 120)

• „It turns out that even the Internet´s most democratic corner is not as democratic as it appears.“ (p. 167)

 

 

 

Critique:

• The Internet changes the way campaigns are run. But the way campaigns are run may change the outcome. Example: Howard Dean, fundraising

• Davis' assumption: every candidate has a website. What if a candidate of one of the two major parties did not have one?

• The Internet might not implement more participation in democratic countries. But it might contribute to good governance by spreading human rights and democratic ideas in non-democratic states.

 

 

Questions / Discussion:

1.  We elaborated that resource-poor candidates, who usually belong to minor parties, are still disadvantaged. Nevertheless do you think they have a better chance of being elected with the growing influence of the Internet as an election tool? Does the Internet lead to more equality and justice than media such as TV, radio or newspaper? Or does it rather function as an extension of these traditional media?
2. Try to find pros and cons for users as well as for candidates that result from the usage of the Internet for campaigns.
3. Davis claims that Usenet is not an “adequate mechanism for public participation and opinion gauge” and supports this statement with several arguments. Which arguments could be found against his thesis?
4. “If such individual-oriented campaigning occurred via the Internet, it would signal a return to a campaigning style from the pretelevision days” (p. 89). Comment on this.
5.  The author makes predictions about future campaigns. Have they become true?
6. Some hail the internet for educating citizens and making them better informed voters. In the election of 2005 in Germany, did you do research on the different parties? Did you have the impression that the Internet played a significant role in the campaign?
7. The text states that the Internet is seen as a medium „for educating individuals, stimulating citizen participation, measuring public opinion, easing citizen access to government officials, offering a public forum, simplifying voter registration, and even facilitating actual voting“ (p. 20). Comment on this from Davis' point of view as well as from yours.
8. The text quotes that the Internet was a “powerful technology for grassroots democracy”. It is able to “solve vexing economic, social and political problems, spread participatory democracy” (p. 20). What is Davis' answer to these statements? What would you respond?