With the introduction of the internet, citizens are using the internet as a means of self expression and free speech. In light of this, governments understand the power of the internet and are using the internet as a means for greater communication channels between them and their citizens. With the introduction of ‘electronic democracy’ or ‘e-democracy’ as it is known, governments are further exploring the power of the internet. In a world where communities on the internet are not subjected to geographical positioning, the term community is now understood to contain a conglomerate of people who have the potential to span the globe. This essay aims to disseminate the uses and limits of the internet in terms of politics and democracy; disseminate what has happened to the nation/state in the age of networks that have the potential to span the whole globe; and also what has happened to the idea of community in the age of the internet. This essay will do this by arguing that society needs to re-think the political.

To begin with, Hague et al suggests that a “strong democracy requires strong and interactive links between the state and civil society, between government and the governed” (1999, p. 13). The introduction of the internet, as Kann suggests has “enabled many-to-many citizen interaction that invited online political debate, deliberation, consultation, decision-making, administration, and scrutiny as well as online mobilizing, organizing, petitioning, and protesting” (www.networkedpublics.org).

In contrast to this, Wilhelm suggests that the internet can “either promote or inhibit in the many-to-many communication in the public sphere” of democracy and the political (2000 pp. 8). Wilhelm further suggests that the internet can be both a threat as much as a vehicle to the progress of democracy and the political (2000). The use of the internet in terms of politics and democracy by governments in recent campaigns has seen the introduction of e-democracy. E-democracy is characterised to “strengthen, expand, and diversify citizen engagement through effective and meaningful online discussions and two-way information exchange on public issues” (http://www.e-democracy.org/objectives.html). To further substantiate this, Best et al suggest, that the use of the internet through political campaigns constitutes a free flow of information that not only allows for efficient passage of commercial information but also for more ‘democratic’ information (2009, p. 256). Although the use of the internet in political campaigns allows governments to widen their communication channels between them and their citizens, the use of the internet also has limits.

The limits for the internet in terms of politics and democracy include people that do not have access to, or do not wish to have access to a computer (www.uniondemocracy.org). For the internet to be effective in terms of politics and democracy, citizen participation is a pinnacle factor. Corrales et al suggests that although governments can introduce new ways to which they communicate with their citizens; in spite of this, the “internet may not necessarily increase citizens appetite for political information and activity” (2002, p. 35). For the internet to be effective in terms of politics and democracy, people must hold a fundamental interest in the political. Although the internet can be employed, it still relies on citizens interests in politics and democracy. In light of this, other limits of the internet in terms of politics and democracy include the “political economy, ownership, control, regulation…as well as the legal frameworks defining the freedoms of – and constraints on- communication” (Dahlgren 2005, p. 149). Dahlgren adds that this is due to the boundaries and limitations for the nature of the information and that circulates (2005, p. 149). Although a democratic nation encourages free speech, a limitation that a citizen of a democracy faces when using the internet for political democracy is in fact controlled and restricted. What they post on the internet is highly scrutinised; as well as what they read is highly ‘encrypted’ (Poster 2001, p. 259)

As well as the uses and limits of the internet in terms of democracy and the political, through the introduction of the internet, the term nation/state has become blurred; therefore governments must re-think the political. Democracy, politics and the term community is now not restricted to a persons geographical situation, but rather what they have access too, and more over, what they have interest in. The internet is making the world smaller, and with a click of a button, “the web…allows us to connect to the world in an instant” (www.webhostinggeeks.com). In the age of networks that have the potential to span the whole globe, the “internet…has certainly decreased the power of the nation-state” (www.dissentmagazine.org/article/?article=1939). This is because the term nation-state has now gone global, or what is called globalisation (http://www.net4dev.se/uimonen). This also leads to the radicalisation of the term community.

Through de-strengthening the term nation-state, the internet has also radically changed the term community. The term ‘community’ on the internet is not subject to time or place, and governments need to re-think the political because for too long the term community only included the public sphere, bemoaning the fact of media interference (www.humanities.uci.edu/mposter/writings/democ.html). The term community is not based on geographical location, but now also includes the internet as a community. The term ‘community’ on the internet details a person interests and affiliations. The term community is now a lot broader because an internet community now has the ability to span the whole globe.

In conclusion, the internet has seen a radical transition of the meanings such as the nation-state, and also the term community. Governments need to rethink the political because the internet has erased the limitations of time and place, and their publics and stakeholders now have the ability to span the globe. The internet in terms of democracy and the political needs to be re-thought as the internet forces “governments to keep their communication borders open” (Best & Wade 2009, p. 256). In conjunction to this The new term of ‘community’ and the power of the nation-state is changing because citizens now have access to all and any information at the click of a button. Because of this, the internet forces “governments to keep their communication borders open” (Best & Wade 2009, p. 256).

References

Best, L & Wade, K. (2009) The Internet and Democracy: Global Catalyst or Democratic Dud?
Bulliten of Science, Technology and Society, 29 (4), (pp. 255 – 271).

Corrales, J. (2002). Lessons from Latin America. In L. D. Simon
(Ed.), Democracy and the internet. (pp. 30-66).

Dahlgren, P (2005). The Internet, Public Spheres, and Political Communication: Dispersion and Deliberation, Political Communcation. Taylor & Franics. 2 (pp. 147 – 162).

Hague, B & Loader B. (1999) Digital Democracy: Discourse and Decision Making in the Information Age. Routledge.

Porter, D (2001). Cyberdemocracy: The internet and the Public Sphere. New York and London: Routledge. (pp. 259).

Wilhelm, A. (2000) Democracy in the Digital Age: Challenges to Political Life in Cyberspace. New York, Routlege.

The Task for week 6 required us to make a short 1 minute slide show on anything that we wanted. While proving frustrating at times, it was also pretty entertaining. Enjoy!!

1. Democracy in the Digital Age by Anthony G Wilhelm

The key information in this book is details how social media and the internet are impacting on political participation in America. Although my assignment is not on political participation in America, it is infact on the impact of social media and it’s effect of political participation. A quote from the text as Wilhelm suggests is “that new technologies are  threats to the progress as much as they are vehicles to the progress”. Wilhelm also suggests “that there is an appearance of progress yet a negligable advancement of the human condition”. The 4 main points of the digitally mediated political life that Wilhelm discusses are resources, inclusiveness, deliberation and design. This book helps my argument by clarifying the first part of the essay; being the uses and limits of the internet in terms of politics and/or democracy.

2. Digital Democracy: Discourse and Decision Making in the Information Age by Barry N Hague and Brian Loader

This text examines the impact of  information and communication technologies and their consequences for political institutions, while also discussing the concept of an emergent electronic democracy. The book also details concepts such as democracy and cyberspace, and how they relate. This book differs from the previous book because as the first book outlined the pro’s and con’s of politics and democracy on the web; this text details how the internet should be used to create a better citizen-government interface, and then by detailing the digital media’s actuall effectiveness on democratic practice. This assists my argument by highlighting the emergence of unintended consequences when using digital media for democracy and political reasons.

3. Democracy and New Media by Henry Jenkins and David Thorburn

This book details how the internet is eliminating democracy from civic life to global through “giving people the access to information and expanding the arena of free speech”. This book assists my essay by detailing the tactics of political campaigners and how they circulate the messages and also by how topics enter the public discourse. This journal is relative to the other journals in its argument. This journal is of great help to my essay as it details step by step the introduction of the internet. A good quote from this text is that “the internet was created by society but the internet is creating society”.

4. The Web of Politics by Richard Davis

This book discusses how the internet is impacting on the politics in America. Unlike the other books which discuss some of the bad points, this journal discusses how the use of the internet and new media benefits the political parties. It analyses the effective tools that parties can use to broadcast their message. This journal assists in my essay as it differentiates the new techniques that can be used in campaigns as apposed to the old techniques through the introduction of new technologies. A quote from this text is  “the future of American politics has been called an age of internet democracy”.

5. Hand Book of New Media: Social Changing and Consequences of ICT’s by Leah Leivrouw and Sonia Livingston

This book discusses the social change and consequences of new communication technologies. Most importantly, is chapter 3 - Politics and New Media. This chapter is the most usefull out of the whole book as it discusses directly the introduction of new voting techniques that have been implemented to gain a larger audience by politics. This book is similiar in its argument to the previous book as it details the benifits. A good quote from this text is ”that the diffusion of the new media, especially the internet,  can transform the now devitalised relationship between political bodies and the citizenry they represent and gorvern.

When the internet started out many years ago it was a very simple, basic feature. Now, the internet is growing so fast, people don’t know how to handle it. It has been marked as another world; cyberspace. One facet of utopia on the internet is the infatuation and craze that society encompasses over certain websites; programs such as Myspace, Facebook and Twitter. In the beginning, everyone was infatuated with myspace, it earnt the creator billions, and it was sold for billions. Soon after though, the craze of myspace slowly died and everyone moved onto facebook. The utopia that created the wealth of myspace is now very rapidly declining in value. With that, the value of facebook has earnt it’s creators billions of dollars. Although the craze of facebook is still going strong, the hype over twitter is greatly becoming more apparent. So a trend is easily identifiable that the infatuation with one site is rapi and fickle, which in turn makes the value and wealth of that site also rapid and fickle. As new sites come into effect, peoples infatuations move on.

Although these sites earn people immense amounts of money quickly, the value of their money can wind down just as quick. Social networking sites that are worth the most money long term are those that are created directly for a market, for example Vampire Raves. Vampire Raves is a social networking site which is catered for people who have a ‘fetish’ or infatuation with the vampire fantasy world. This site has been around along time; long before teenage girls started sweating over Edward Cullen from Twilight. Social networking sites like this are steadfast and ensure longevity, proving to be of great value to the creator.

Another form of Utopia on the web are sites such as ‘unclyclopedia’. Uncyclopedia is a site which is able to be updated by anyone, with anything they want. Another form of this site is the urban dictionary. These websites prove most entertaining as some of the entries are quite colourful.

Another aspect of utopia on the web is people’s ability to create and share their interests. Sites such as 4Chan is a site dedicated to allowing people the ability to share images (within reason). Another website such as this is a website where photos of cats are added daily with humurous captions placed on the photo’s. Sites such as these have a large cult following and prove entertaining.

All up, Jason was very entertaining.

In a democratic nation such as Australia, the implementation of a system such as this will bring our country into line with other nations such as China (which is a communist country). For the democratic people of Australia, this is a pretty big slap in the face. As a nation, they basically controlling what we can and can’t do.

On the contrary, material that is being accessed in this country such as child pornoghraphy and extremist terrorist websites, should be blocked from from view, for the protection of our democratic nation. But then that would go against democracy wouldn’t it?

Respond to a professional blogger at a major news site -
I responded to Joe Hildebrand’s rant on Kyle Sandilands idiocy and complete lack of actually being funny. I agreed with Joe and his suggestions about Kyle. Amusing reading.

What is Barack Obama up to today?
President Obama called the United Nations to order today in regards to the effect of a nuclear attack on cities such as New York, Paris and London. 24th September 2009.

Find out who your Local, state, and federal representatives are -
Local – Andrew Fraser (Auchenflower)
State – Anna Bligh (Queensland)
Federal – Kevin Rudd

Look up the Queensland or Australian hansard and find out the last time your local MP spoke in Parliament -
Robert L Lee hasn’t spoken in Parliament, however the last time Anna Bligh spoke in Parliament was the 16/06/2009.

Let your local member know what you think about their last speach -
Andrew Frasers last speach that I could find was about the developments of unit blocks in the Auchenflower area, which I welcomed, as some new buildings will hopfully bring some colour to this dull area.

The definition of democracy is; both representative democracy and participatory/direct democracy. Representative democracy inlcudes universal suffrage, and the extension of government into social affairs. Representative democracy also norrows down societies ability to effectively practice free speach as the power of the parties focus on finding a compromise between competing special interest. Representative democracy is basically a society governed by a political party, and although encouraged to practice free speech, are still governed and chastised if it goes against the political parties ideals, and ultimately, the goverment has the power to make all of the decisions. Participatory democracy is where all citizens have the right and duty to be involved in all decisions made.

The introduction of new communication techonologies has been able to bend the sphere of the current representative democracy where communication techonologies have allowed every day people such as you and I to question and openly ridicule the actions of the goverment bodies. This, known as free speech, is a facet of democracy, and democracy is built on the grounds of push and pull between citizens and government.

In the cyber world, free speach leads to the hacking of computer systems. It was made clear to me that hackers are not actualy that bad. They are simply computer enthusiasts who want access to, and be able to use computer systems for free. They agree the the cyber world should be a democracy and feel that they should have access to what they want, when they want. The hacker ethos is that they never harm the data that they find, they just don’t want to pay for it. Crackers on the other hand, are individuals that damage and steal data for reasons such as fraudulant activity; and that crackers are the ones that create viruses that ruin your computer.

At first the information was quite alot to grasp and at first seemed like a lot of jargon, but after reading a few times it all proves pretty interesting, and true. Why as a democratic society, are we so heavily stricted in what we can and can’t do on the internet, simply because people want to make money. Why are there so many barriers and sanctions? Things always taste better when they are free, so maybe these hackers know something we don’t!

The idea of Creative Commons came from the ‘Free Software Movement’. The likes such as Microsoft and Apple create software for us to use, but at a price. Quite a hefty price. The free software movement came about where people started thinking, If we have bought a computer, why should we have to pay to use it? And why should the likes of Microsoft and Apple tell us how we can and can’t use our computer?

Richard M Stallman started the Free Software Foundation in 1981. It was based around the Free Software Principles;

Principle 0: The freedom to run the program, for any purpose
Principle 1: The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs
Principle 2: The freedom to redistribute copies so you can help your neighbour
Principle 3: The freedom to improve the program, and release your improvements to the public, so that the whole community benefits.

The Free Software Movement has seen the battle between Proprietary and Open Source. Proprietary systems include the likes of Windows Vista and Internet Explorer and Open Source include FireFox and OpenOffice. Proprietary, of course, needs to be paid for, and prgrams from Open Source, are all free.

One thing I found very interesting, is that all of my friends have photoshop, which I don’t. This annoys me. But after the lecture, I discovered that there is a free version available for people to use. After having a quick look at it though, it seems pretty hard to use.

www.fanfilms.net
www.thetrailermash.com

Now with the technology infiltrating smartphones, this has allowed a culture of people making movies using their mobile phones. After viewing a few movies from mobile phones, it’s clear (or unclear to be exact) that the technology still has a little bit to come yet, as quality in the footage is usually pretty average. On the contrary, some must be pretty good as their have even been ‘Mobile-Movie-Festivals’ in recent years, however they have not proved sustainable and are usually a one off event.

Although the movies prove entertaining, you wonder what the people who create them do for a day job…