This research reports, given the objective assessment of the site Italian parliamentarian, agrees with the statement made by Bentivegna (2002), namely that overall, the online Parliament has become more accessible to citizens on the activities that take place in the classroom but continues to remain waterproof in front of possible forms of direct contact with individuals who justify its own existence: the voters. In support of this impermeability may be the place MEPs fear felt by a gradual erosion of representative democracy in favor of the direct (p. 148).
examining the sites of the Italian Parliament and UK Parliament, the first difference noted is that while the former for its two bodies, the House and the Senate, refers to different URLs, if the British House of Commons and the House of Lords benefit of a specific section within the same site. In English one can be perceived, therefore, an overview of the two assemblies in the different parts, but inseparable, a single large organism. Instead, the site of the Italian Parliament that sense, at least from the point of view of the web, is not perceived, by contrast arises emphasis on two structures apart, with sites also in the colors and graphics look completely different.
Furthermore, looking at these two instruments so different, in my view, stands the very fact that the Italian is rather static, given the predominance of general information and the lack of concrete instruments to a two-way exchange, limited to the opportunity to interact through email. A little nature aiming at a two-way communication, useless to the emergence of the e-democracy mentioned by many, but good vehicle for information. In fact, there are no active forms of online participation and interactivity serious and continuous. It seems to me necessary to point out the lack of useful tools such as, for example, online consultations, support an immediate need to explore and rational public opinion on particular issues civilians, but the desertion of any form of multilateral exchange such as forums and chat. The latter could have become the means by which members of parliament could have put at the forefront order established a dialogue with voters and at the same time create an opportunity for growth and responsible citizen. But it seems almost obvious that the intent in building the apparatus of the parliament has its own website to avoid such a system. It can be said that the Italian side sharing tools are absent citizen in the democratic process and therefore we can not talk about implementation of the so-called e-democracy in our context parliament. This means that it takes away the citizen the opportunity to take a serious social responsibility in advancing the country through its contribution in the discussion of draft laws, proposals and so helps to regulate by law the company. As mentioned, the main function of the three sites of the Italian Parliament is complex information, and in terms of access to information that I believe apply correctly all the parameters required by industry regulations, having generally the easy usability, guaranteed by a simple design that makes possible an easily readable, good contrast of colors, which highlights the most important aspects, the ease in finding information, the provision of information and the presence of the search engine. The airworthiness seems somewhat defensive on the schematic layout of the content on the basis of its sectors, which thereby prevents a user disorientation.
Regarding the site of the British Parliament the situation seems quite different. At first glance catches the eye of the navigator, the rational and well-defined structure of a site that is both rich in content and easy usability. Apart from the features on usability, navigability and accessibility, all perfectly proportioned, very interesting is the presence of related movies special holidays, such as the time when I did my assessment there was a shooting on the Christmas tree decorations in front of Parliament buildings, a small example of the 'English humor . Very important from the point of view is the presence of an interactive blog of Lords which is an experimental project to encourage direct dialogue between web users across the world and Members of the House of Lords, in order to exchange opinions on laws and other themes.
Even scholars in the sector agree to define a positive structure and management of United Kigdom Parliament website, in fact, the British Web Design and Marketing Association has described him in an interview on 2 July 2002 as a sito'simple, elegant and business-like 'and' the best example of "open government" adoption of Internet technologies That We Have Seen '. It should be stressed that it is one of the most advanced in terms of interactivity and feedback. Moreover, it seems that the site of the British Parliament is in constant evolution, a dynamic tool updated constantly with movies that recall the various occasions of the year. In fact, conducting a quick search on the development of the same, I have learned that this tool in recent years was involved in many changes due to a specific project involving civil, in order to comply with the new Citizens' Rights. Exactly, the strategic plan promoted by the British Parliament in 2004 and mentioned in the report entitled "Connecting Parliament with the Public, has given the inputs to a specific site audit. After an awareness of the shortcomings inherent, as is clear from the document, the House of Commons Commission has worked on the site in order to affirm the following principles: A.
use information and communication technologies (ICTs) to enhance the accessibility of Parliament and for the public, exercising his right to use any convenient way to communicate with colleagues and Committees of the House.
B. Use ICT to improve the professionalism of the deputies, their staff and the staff room, in all aspects of parliamentary life.
C. Use ICT to increase public participation in parliamentary proceedings, allowing them to tap into the broadest possible base of experience, including in particular those that have been traditionally excluded from political and parliamentary process.
D. Recognizing the value of opening and using ICT to enable, as far as possible to the public to have access to its proceedings and documents.
E. Develop and share best practices on ICT use by parliamentarians and other government agencies, both within the United Kingdom and elsewhere, working in collaboration with external organizations.
a "radical redesign" of the website was finally approved in principle by the relevant committees in both houses in the spring of 2006, and work has begun planning for a five-year program of improvements (Tinley 2008).
At this point you can answer the question asked at the beginning of this report (ie how the Western democracies have taken advantage of the network?). As we have seen in several parts, has attempted to show that in general the network has the potential to become the venue to create forms of participation and empowerment Citizens, however, different applications, the result of different political perspectives, not always lead to positive results in this direction.
Therefore, the sites tested showed that if in some cases have established the principles of e-democracy and create opportunities for citizen participation, in others this has not happened, but rather the network has created virtual spaces served as transpositions online information practices that already exist offline.
examining the sites of the Italian Parliament and UK Parliament, the first difference noted is that while the former for its two bodies, the House and the Senate, refers to different URLs, if the British House of Commons and the House of Lords benefit of a specific section within the same site. In English one can be perceived, therefore, an overview of the two assemblies in the different parts, but inseparable, a single large organism. Instead, the site of the Italian Parliament that sense, at least from the point of view of the web, is not perceived, by contrast arises emphasis on two structures apart, with sites also in the colors and graphics look completely different.
Furthermore, looking at these two instruments so different, in my view, stands the very fact that the Italian is rather static, given the predominance of general information and the lack of concrete instruments to a two-way exchange, limited to the opportunity to interact through email. A little nature aiming at a two-way communication, useless to the emergence of the e-democracy mentioned by many, but good vehicle for information. In fact, there are no active forms of online participation and interactivity serious and continuous. It seems to me necessary to point out the lack of useful tools such as, for example, online consultations, support an immediate need to explore and rational public opinion on particular issues civilians, but the desertion of any form of multilateral exchange such as forums and chat. The latter could have become the means by which members of parliament could have put at the forefront order established a dialogue with voters and at the same time create an opportunity for growth and responsible citizen. But it seems almost obvious that the intent in building the apparatus of the parliament has its own website to avoid such a system. It can be said that the Italian side sharing tools are absent citizen in the democratic process and therefore we can not talk about implementation of the so-called e-democracy in our context parliament. This means that it takes away the citizen the opportunity to take a serious social responsibility in advancing the country through its contribution in the discussion of draft laws, proposals and so helps to regulate by law the company. As mentioned, the main function of the three sites of the Italian Parliament is complex information, and in terms of access to information that I believe apply correctly all the parameters required by industry regulations, having generally the easy usability, guaranteed by a simple design that makes possible an easily readable, good contrast of colors, which highlights the most important aspects, the ease in finding information, the provision of information and the presence of the search engine. The airworthiness seems somewhat defensive on the schematic layout of the content on the basis of its sectors, which thereby prevents a user disorientation.
Regarding the site of the British Parliament the situation seems quite different. At first glance catches the eye of the navigator, the rational and well-defined structure of a site that is both rich in content and easy usability. Apart from the features on usability, navigability and accessibility, all perfectly proportioned, very interesting is the presence of related movies special holidays, such as the time when I did my assessment there was a shooting on the Christmas tree decorations in front of Parliament buildings, a small example of the 'English humor . Very important from the point of view is the presence of an interactive blog of Lords which is an experimental project to encourage direct dialogue between web users across the world and Members of the House of Lords, in order to exchange opinions on laws and other themes.
Even scholars in the sector agree to define a positive structure and management of United Kigdom Parliament website, in fact, the British Web Design and Marketing Association has described him in an interview on 2 July 2002 as a sito'simple, elegant and business-like 'and' the best example of "open government" adoption of Internet technologies That We Have Seen '. It should be stressed that it is one of the most advanced in terms of interactivity and feedback. Moreover, it seems that the site of the British Parliament is in constant evolution, a dynamic tool updated constantly with movies that recall the various occasions of the year. In fact, conducting a quick search on the development of the same, I have learned that this tool in recent years was involved in many changes due to a specific project involving civil, in order to comply with the new Citizens' Rights. Exactly, the strategic plan promoted by the British Parliament in 2004 and mentioned in the report entitled "Connecting Parliament with the Public, has given the inputs to a specific site audit. After an awareness of the shortcomings inherent, as is clear from the document, the House of Commons Commission has worked on the site in order to affirm the following principles: A.
use information and communication technologies (ICTs) to enhance the accessibility of Parliament and for the public, exercising his right to use any convenient way to communicate with colleagues and Committees of the House.
B. Use ICT to improve the professionalism of the deputies, their staff and the staff room, in all aspects of parliamentary life.
C. Use ICT to increase public participation in parliamentary proceedings, allowing them to tap into the broadest possible base of experience, including in particular those that have been traditionally excluded from political and parliamentary process.
D. Recognizing the value of opening and using ICT to enable, as far as possible to the public to have access to its proceedings and documents.
E. Develop and share best practices on ICT use by parliamentarians and other government agencies, both within the United Kingdom and elsewhere, working in collaboration with external organizations.
a "radical redesign" of the website was finally approved in principle by the relevant committees in both houses in the spring of 2006, and work has begun planning for a five-year program of improvements (Tinley 2008).
At this point you can answer the question asked at the beginning of this report (ie how the Western democracies have taken advantage of the network?). As we have seen in several parts, has attempted to show that in general the network has the potential to become the venue to create forms of participation and empowerment Citizens, however, different applications, the result of different political perspectives, not always lead to positive results in this direction.
Therefore, the sites tested showed that if in some cases have established the principles of e-democracy and create opportunities for citizen participation, in others this has not happened, but rather the network has created virtual spaces served as transpositions online information practices that already exist offline.
0 comments:
Post a Comment