The question that now most of all is asked is really the Internet and other new technologies, which both seem to result act as a vehicle for greater participation and centralization of the citizen in public decision making?
As shown by the presence of numerous investigations and reporting, there is in the field of public communication, in political science, social science and computer science in general, a strong emphasis on digital policies, although still not be able to form a single view on the real possibility of their implementation. On the other hand, different and opposing arguments accompany debates on e-democracy, but in general there are two perspectives: one that advocated by those who Rolando (2003) defines the so-called cyber-enthusiast, or those who see in net return to direct democracy, trusting in the real participation of all citizens to public issues with the subsequent delineation of the power broker of the political means and traditional information. Citizens with tools for immediate interaction with public institutions may, on the one hand, increase interactivity (think the use of forums, blogs, newsletters, etc..) That would lead to greater awareness of rights and duties as members of civil society and, second, to help with his speech in public decisions. Continuing in the wake of Rolando terminology, all other views will be cyber-skeptic, who by acknowledging the extraordinary innovation of communication technologies and information, doubt that their simple application on the forms of political organization automatically mute the current arrangements. On the contrary, they believe that the advent of the network will strengthen the current form of democracy, even creating problems of exclusion of economically disadvantaged classes. The blogosphere would re-awaken the error of the traditional circles of opinion with the marginality of the demos and the centralization of elite individual (ie, who has provided the means).
Therefore, the views on the subject are many and sometimes conflicting, but my impression is that literature is mostly devoted to consider the true expressions more skeptical, in fact there are those who like Lusoli (2005) argues that "although it could free the citizens from the saddle of the institutions, new technologies enter the dynamics in the individualistic, or deliberative community that do not lead necessarily to more democratic outcomes." (P. 13).
While discarding a too restrictive approach in relation to the benefits created by new technologies, I share the thought of Calise (2006) in considering that in some cases, you have the feeling of being faced with a development of e-democracy to the advantage of face corporate leaders in the computer industry and political leaders of government. It gives rise to a real e-corporatism, as opposed to the effort to realize a project for serious and successful membership of the e-Citizens in the process of democratization. Even there, where the e-partecipation were implemented successfully, ensures that no one can speak of true direct participation because the fact remains that the network is still too complex a system run by a few players who dictate the rules of the game.
It should also be taken into mind that it is still of computer mediated communication between institutions and citizens, that a communication mediated by several factors, such as telecommunications infrastructure and protocols, so it is truthful and not misleading to speak only of "direct participation". In fact, as stated by Santaniello, between the individual and his car is opposed by a large area standards and those who steal the user effective control of the so-called personal computer, in this case perhaps speaks more of instrument control software, but it is said that this state of affairs did not even pour over the landscape of democratic freedoms.
Goldsmith and Wu (2006) are agreed, speaking of the development of the Internet, though at first there was the hope of being able to convey a clear communication link from any government, now dominated once again the great powers and especially c ' is the awareness that those who are in power will not give some of his scepter in the name of freedom of thought or civil participation. In addition, looking the way in which public institutions governing the intermediate areas of the network, we realize that they are moving in a rather uncertain enabling the development of private land also as regards the implementation of e-democracy and therefore the construction of surfaces public interaction (Amoretti, 2006). While it is obvious the interest of big companies, leaders in the IT sector in respect of the new market offered by public institutions. This can be supported by the fact that multinationals like IBM, Microsoft and NTT Data Corporation, not only acting in the background, but logically guided by their private interests, emphasize the social and political role of new media, so to do themselves as promoters of policies for education, economic development, e-democracy, etc..
Specifically, should therefore be emphasized that the coding of the fundamental architecture of the network have a significant impact on projects acting as a filter between democratic institutions and citizens.
As shown by the presence of numerous investigations and reporting, there is in the field of public communication, in political science, social science and computer science in general, a strong emphasis on digital policies, although still not be able to form a single view on the real possibility of their implementation. On the other hand, different and opposing arguments accompany debates on e-democracy, but in general there are two perspectives: one that advocated by those who Rolando (2003) defines the so-called cyber-enthusiast, or those who see in net return to direct democracy, trusting in the real participation of all citizens to public issues with the subsequent delineation of the power broker of the political means and traditional information. Citizens with tools for immediate interaction with public institutions may, on the one hand, increase interactivity (think the use of forums, blogs, newsletters, etc..) That would lead to greater awareness of rights and duties as members of civil society and, second, to help with his speech in public decisions. Continuing in the wake of Rolando terminology, all other views will be cyber-skeptic, who by acknowledging the extraordinary innovation of communication technologies and information, doubt that their simple application on the forms of political organization automatically mute the current arrangements. On the contrary, they believe that the advent of the network will strengthen the current form of democracy, even creating problems of exclusion of economically disadvantaged classes. The blogosphere would re-awaken the error of the traditional circles of opinion with the marginality of the demos and the centralization of elite individual (ie, who has provided the means).
Therefore, the views on the subject are many and sometimes conflicting, but my impression is that literature is mostly devoted to consider the true expressions more skeptical, in fact there are those who like Lusoli (2005) argues that "although it could free the citizens from the saddle of the institutions, new technologies enter the dynamics in the individualistic, or deliberative community that do not lead necessarily to more democratic outcomes." (P. 13).
While discarding a too restrictive approach in relation to the benefits created by new technologies, I share the thought of Calise (2006) in considering that in some cases, you have the feeling of being faced with a development of e-democracy to the advantage of face corporate leaders in the computer industry and political leaders of government. It gives rise to a real e-corporatism, as opposed to the effort to realize a project for serious and successful membership of the e-Citizens in the process of democratization. Even there, where the e-partecipation were implemented successfully, ensures that no one can speak of true direct participation because the fact remains that the network is still too complex a system run by a few players who dictate the rules of the game.
It should also be taken into mind that it is still of computer mediated communication between institutions and citizens, that a communication mediated by several factors, such as telecommunications infrastructure and protocols, so it is truthful and not misleading to speak only of "direct participation". In fact, as stated by Santaniello, between the individual and his car is opposed by a large area standards and those who steal the user effective control of the so-called personal computer, in this case perhaps speaks more of instrument control software, but it is said that this state of affairs did not even pour over the landscape of democratic freedoms.
Goldsmith and Wu (2006) are agreed, speaking of the development of the Internet, though at first there was the hope of being able to convey a clear communication link from any government, now dominated once again the great powers and especially c ' is the awareness that those who are in power will not give some of his scepter in the name of freedom of thought or civil participation. In addition, looking the way in which public institutions governing the intermediate areas of the network, we realize that they are moving in a rather uncertain enabling the development of private land also as regards the implementation of e-democracy and therefore the construction of surfaces public interaction (Amoretti, 2006). While it is obvious the interest of big companies, leaders in the IT sector in respect of the new market offered by public institutions. This can be supported by the fact that multinationals like IBM, Microsoft and NTT Data Corporation, not only acting in the background, but logically guided by their private interests, emphasize the social and political role of new media, so to do themselves as promoters of policies for education, economic development, e-democracy, etc..
Specifically, should therefore be emphasized that the coding of the fundamental architecture of the network have a significant impact on projects acting as a filter between democratic institutions and citizens.
0 comments:
Post a Comment