*** Democracies Online Newswire - http://e-democracy.org/do *** *** *** *** Up to seven posts a week. To join over 2500 subscribers, *** *** e-mail <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, in message: sub do-wire ***
Three abstracts of interest with links to the full papers are listed below. I generally concur with Agre's "amplification analysis." It is important for the academic community to ask the right research questions. Early on it seemed that the formula being tested was: (Internet + Politics)M = E-Democracy Utopia To the M power that is. M as far as I can tell was an expectation for democratic "magic" that would occur when "as is" politics and citizens got online. Of course, that overly optimistic strawman path can be pointed out as a failure. I'd like to suggest a better, more challenging formula for researchers to test: Political Goal 1 * Online Strategy/Tech A = Outcome X Political Goal 1 * Online Strategy/Tech B = Outcome Y Political Goal 1 * Online Strategy/Tech C = Outcome Z Political Goal 2 * Online Strategy/Tech A = Outcome W and so on ... So the challenge is to test which online strategies or technologies when applied to different political goals lead to the best outcome. In the end the value of e-democracy will look something like this: (Outcome X + Y + Z)D (Power) = E-democracy potential D = Democratic intent. As far as I can tell the positive impact of the online world on democracy will be very minimal, perhaps actually negative, without real doses of _democratic intent_. Whether this intent comes from existing democratic actors from "as is" politics or from new civil society initiatives "of" the Internet, the only way to spread the positive potential (that many of us have experienced first hand!) of this medium is to demonstrate and measure beneficial (and negative) outcomes. Most people in politics don't take unnecessary risks, it is not in their nature. So every e-democracy lesson or experience must be documented and shared widely or the skeptics will win and the Net will be listed with television as contributing to not just contributing to the abstract decline in democracy, but to a real breakdown in the ability of societies to govern themselves and work together to meet public challenges. On that note, keep that research coming. It is vitally important to future of democracy in the information age. Steven Clift Democracies Online P.S. The formula stuff comes from the beginning of my Global E- Democracy Trends speech: http://www.publicus.net/speaker.html From: http://dlis.gseis.ucla.edu/people/pagre/real-time.html Real-Time Politics: The Internet and the Political Process Philip E. Agre, Department of Information Studies, UCLA Research on the Internet's role in politics has struggled to transcend technological determinism -- the assumption, often inadvertent, that the technology simply imprints its own logic on social relationships. An alternative approach traces the ways, often numerous, in which an institution's participants appropriate the technology in the service of goals, strategies, and relationships that the institution has already organized. This amplification model can be applied in analyzing the Internet's role in politics. After critically surveying a list of widely held views on the matter, this paper illustrates how the amplification model might be applied to concrete problems. These include the development of social networks and ways that technology is used to bind people together into a polity. Available from: http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/output.html Political Organisations And Online Mobilisation: Different Media - Same Outcomes? Wainer Lusoli, Stephen J. Ward and Rachel K. Gibson The low turnout at the 2001 general election heightened concerns about the state of representative democracy and political participation in the UK. Increasingly, the Internet and other Information Communication Technologies (ICTs) have been seen as offering a possible means of reinvigorating political organisations and institutions in the UK. Enthusiasts have suggested that such technologies can help re-engaging citizens into the political process and allow organisations, such as parties, to mobilise the public more easily. Using website content analysis and interviews, this paper investigates some these claims by examining the online participatory activities of a range of political organisations including: parties, trade unions, pressure groups and protest networks. On the basis of our evidence, we argue that the web is more an informational than participatory tool and that so far many political organisations have been slow to exploit its interactive possibilities. However, w! hilst it easy to be critical of their activities, there remains significant technological and political barriers which hinder the use of ICTs for political mobilisation. Available from: http://www.esri.salford.ac.uk/ESRCResearchproject/output.html The Internet and Political Campaigning: the new medium comes of age? Rachel K. Gibson, Stephen J. Ward and Wainer Lusoli Parties around the world have been moving into cyberspace since the mid-1990s, however, for much of the early years it was not evident that many of them had any clearly defined ideas about what the Internet would prove useful for, and how they should present themselves on it. As time has passed, however, a number of common trends have clearly emerged in party's 'thinking' about the new medium and also in their stylistic and content considerations on the web. This research reviews the development of parties' use of the internet, specifically the World Wide Web (WWW) and e-mail from a comparative perspective (with an emphasis on four countries - the UK, the US, Australia and Germany). The questions asked focus on when parties set up their sites, what reasons can be identified behind their having done so, and whether certain types parties have proved more adept in using the internet than others. After profiling the 'supply' side of the equation, we then turn to look at the 'deman! d' for party websites and discuss the crucial issue of how far having a website actually matters for parties. Does campaigning online really make a difference to voters and if so, in what way? While an obvious measure of success may be whether the site actually produces an increase in the electoral support for the party. It may be that its advantages are more subtle and diffuse in that it creates a positive image of organisational competence and more importantly contemporary relevance? ^ ^ ^ ^ Steven L. Clift - W: http://www.publicus.net Minneapolis - - - E: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Minnesota - - - - - T: +1.612.822.8667 USA - - - - - - - ICQ: 13789183 *** Past Messages, Discussion http://e-democracy.org/do *** *** To subscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** *** Message body: SUB DO-WIRE *** *** To UNSUBSCRIBE instead, write: UNSUB DO-WIRE *** *** Please forward this post to others and encourage *** *** them to subscribe to the free DO-WIRE service. *** *** Please send submissions to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ***