Steven Clift
Wed, 02 Nov 2005 08:58:38 -0800
*** Democracies Online Newswire - http://dowire.org *** *** Headlines from top blogs: http://dowire.org/feeds ***
See the post for the links and add your comments: http://www.dowire.org/notes/?p=66 Challenging the Norms and Standards of Election Administration: Standards for EMBs Use of the Internet - Draft for Comment: http://www.ifes.org/files/Clift_Paper_final.pdf Should voters expect privacy when seeking information about candidates online? Draft paper on international electoral standards and the Internet We hear a lot about the importance of "free and fair elections." Observers are sent in, internal political groups are mobilized, the media is critical - and if some election practice violates an electoral standard we tend to hear about. In some cases, countries, the Ukraine say "do over." In other countries, the legitimacy of leadership is questioned. What if you were asked to recommend changes to the electoral standards themselves to keep them up with the information age? That was essentially the task I was given by IFES, a leading group dedicated to election assistance and democratic development around the world. A simple example "information age" standard might say, if the electoral management body that running an election doesn't provide X, Y, or Z content on their website, they are not running a "free and fair election." Another example, might relate to the regulation (non-regulation) of political blogs used to influence the outcome of elections. This is a hot topic in the United States (after I submitted this paper to IFES). My paper dramatically titled, Challenging the Norms and Standards of Election Administration: Standards for EMBs (Election Management Bodies) Use of the Internet is part of a series of discussion papers in the Election Standards Project asking for your comments. Before I share a small section of my paper, let me comment on voter privacy and how your political information seeking behavior from media-based (mostly commercial) voter guides might expose your voting decision-making process. If my recommended standard on voter privacy is adopted, countries would need laws protecting your information seeking behavior on election matters. For example, right now, if I visit the StarTribune's myVote voter guide on the race for Mayor. While I wouldn't mind page content based online ads from candidates (they don't have them here), I can imagine a day where data on registered users (newspapers know who we are - we exchange our identities for content) are known would be of interest to candidates. Candidates and political parties buy data about voters all of the time, should it be legal for the StarTribune (sorry to pick on you) or any online voter guide to sell my contact information (or the ability to contact me online) to a candidate or any political group based on my specific browsing (online reading) behavior? What about government-funded non-partisan online voter guides (there should be more IMHO), should they be allowed to even collect data on how identifiable voters use such websites? Should laws exist to protect that data from public disclosure? This is a policy can-0-worms that can be informed by an international review of election standards in light of the information-age. Challenging the Norms and Standards of Election Administration: Standards for EMBs Use of the Internet Mr. Steven Clift I. Introduction This article proposes international electoral standards for the use of the Internet during election campaigns (outside of voting). Regardless of whether the complexity and controversy surrounding Internet voting is ever resolved, election administrators will have to decide how they will use the Internet to improve election processes and better inform voters. As has been seen in elections around the world, the influence of the Internet is growing. What content and services must be online to ensure that influence is a positive one and to ensure the Internet promotes free and fair elections? The emerging role of the Internet during election campaigns deserves close attention. It may be that changes in campaigning and citizen action online, rather than e-voting, present the real opportunities for?or challenges to?democratic transformation. There are many examples of online best practices during election periods. Once documented and shared, such practices can bring existing democratic freedoms and electoral standards to life where they are applied. However, while most election-related benefits from online activities will be gained through best practices, a standards - established model for "must-have" and "should have" online elements is emerging. As more citizens come online, electoral management bodies (EMBs) will see their online responsibilities increase. Clearly, these responsibilities will arrive sooner in "wired" countries with active online populations, but they will eventually arrive everywhere. Creating a shared body of best practice now can benefit all democracies over time. II. Two Proposed Internet-Era Electoral Standards This article contains numerous recommendations, but two key suggestions for information-age electoral standards particularly deserve attention and debate and inform all of the recommendations below: 1. All information produced, compiled, disseminated or disclosed to implement electoral standards must be publicly accessible on the Internet in a standard, authoritative format. 2. Voter privacy must be established to cover all voter actions online (seeking information about political candidates and issues; communicating with family, friends and members of private associations about elections or governance; and voting). The need for the first standard is intuitive. In order to build trust in the electoral process, promote voter participation, encourage informed voting and ensure legal compliance, EMBs must make public all information about election standards, laws, regulations and voter education programs. In addition, existing electoral standards require broad and timely access to this information. It is almost impossible to conceive of any democratic purpose served by keeping such information offline. The second proposed standard opens an area of great debate. The Internet era provides many ways to track individual behavior; however, to ensure continued participation in the electoral system, voters must feel they can freely explore the raw materials of political thought without fearing public exposure by those with state, media or economic power. Read on. And comment publicly here or send private feedback to me and to Rakesh Sharma with IFES. View this DoWire.Org post on Steven Clift's Notes blog:: http://www.dowire.org/notes/?p=66 ^ ^ ^ ^ Steven L. Clift - - - W: http://publicus.net Minneapolis - - - - E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota - - - - - - T: +1.612.822.8667 USA - - - - Skype/MSN/Y!/AIM: netclift Join Democracies Online: http://dowire.org Start an Issues Forum: http://e-democracy.org/if *** Past Messages, to Subscribe: http://dowire.org *** *** To subscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** Message body: SUB DO-WIRE *** *** To UNSUBSCRIBE instead, write: UNSUB DO-WIRE *** *** Please send submissions to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** New RSS XML Feed Available: *** http://www.mail-archive.com/do-wire@lists.umn.edu/maillist.xml