Our logo is bigger now

Has Social Media Helped Democracy?

13 posts / 0 new

Log in or register to post comments

Sat, 2013-04-20 15:05

#1

AWShannon

Has Social Media Helped Democracy?

Nowadays, with the explosion of social media, everyone has the chance to everyone to express themselves freely and have a chance to be heard on a worldwide level at the simple touch of a keyboard or smartphone. Now my question is, in your views, has social media helped democracy in any way?

One one hand, one may argue that it has because everyone now has a direct way to let their views known on a worldwide level, but how important i

On the other hand, politicians and the media also participate in social media, so is it really more social or democratic, or still very influenced by the media?

Let the debate start!

Issues Pages:

Sat, 2013-06-08 21:24

#2

TMcDermott TMcDermott's picture

TMcDermott's picture

Social media has played a significant role in some major international uprisings such as Egypt. Of course the end result of that was not democracy but very anti-democratic governmental actions. In terms of goverment and democracy or democratic debate, I think for the most part it has done little. One could argue that governments simply flooded various types of social media that it acts more as propaganda than a meaningful democratic debate. Still, we have to pay attention because in my view governments are using social media to bury negative announcements under something that sounds good. In reality, I don't spend anytime following goverment action or any debate through twitter or facebook. The internet and websites do offer more information but it is often very difficult and sometimes seems impossible to engage in any back and forth discussions.

Fri, 2014-06-13 08:09

#3

Slumberjack

To pose the question from the title of this thread is to answer it apparently, especially as it concerns pseudonymous political commentary and citizen dissent, and the tender sensitivities of the political spectrum.

Commenters snipe from sidelines

Quote:
anonymity produces uncivil debate because it removes shame from the equation.

This is an odd comment from out the bowels of a smelly political system that routinely proves that it has no clue as to the meaning of the word ‘shame.’ Such thought processes only reinforces many of the suggestions being circulated these days that all of this slimy wretchedness must either go or be left to rot.

Fri, 2014-06-13 14:59

#4

6079_Smith_W

Yes.

Fri, 2014-06-13 15:00

#5

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

alan smithee's picture

No.

Fri, 2014-06-13 15:45

#6

6079_Smith_W

Didn't know you were a fan of democracy, alan.

Without getting into corruption, abuse, propaganda and rigged games, I base my opinion on the fact that having another channel can only lead to a more open process. Doesn't matter if people from all sides are using it.

And there are enough examples of broken stories we would not have without social media - from amateur video to mass-leaks of information - that I consider it on the whole a good thing. We are using it right now.

Of course one has to pay attention. But when has that not been the case?

Sat, 2014-06-14 19:43

#7

Aristotleded24

And it's not as if it's impossible for governments to clamp down on social media, as we've seen in examples of outright bans in some countries or the vicious battle going on about Net Neutratlity in the US.

Sat, 2014-06-14 21:10

#8

takeitslowly

Social media can cause further alienation, i think face to face contact is the best way to engage in a democractic process. I engage inalot of online debates but i think people just stick to their own opinons more or less most of the time. I don't know if it changes anything.

My opinion is that the internet help people to solidify one’s entrenched opinion. However, changes only happen in a real life setting where people can relate to each other, and interact with each other and engage with each other in a more personal setting.

And i am not sure how many people go on social media to engage in politics or just to do their own thing, which makes them even more oblivious to whatever that is happening in the political world.

Sat, 2014-06-14 21:18

#9

Aristotleded24

takeitslowly wrote:
Social media can cause further alienation, i think face to face contact is the best way to engage in a democractic process. I engage inalot of online debates but i think people just stick to their own opinons more or less most of the time. I don't know if it changes anything.

My opinion is that the internet help people to solidify one’s entrenched opinion. However, changes only happen in a real life setting where people can relate to each other, and interact with each other and engage with each other in a more personal setting.

And i am not sure how many people go on social media to engage in politics or just to do their own thing, which makes them even more oblivious to whatever that is happening in the political world.

I agree, and it's frightening to see how many people under 35 depend on social media, and who don't seem to be able to understand the real effort that it takes to maintain human relationships that aren't mediated by a digital medium.

As for the topic at hand, I think a key reason that social media was effective in these cases had less to do with the social media and that the cultures involved don't seem to have the same levels of alienation that exist in the industrialized West. I think it was more of an additional tool than the key thing.

Sat, 2014-06-14 22:31

6079_Smith_W

That notwithstanding, I think we have forgotten how hard it was to get information before the internet. The first winter I lived in Europe (87) I don't think I heard more than one or two Canadian news stories in the regular media. Imagine how it was getting even more obscure information. Some countries can clamp down to some degree, but that doesn't change theeffectthe internet and other technology have on an issue, particularly beyond those borders.

Sat, 2014-06-21 23:05

Vicky_Sask

It has Definetly NOT:

Twitter: To few characters, plus people are just interested in gaining followers. Not what in the followers are saying if they even read it or care.

Facebook: Was ok, but now the message button is removable and again who responds.

These could be helpful if whose ever page or feed was on actually responded, instead of just paying attention to "followers" or "likes". That goes for news casts and anchors aswell.

Tue, 2014-06-24 18:28

Pondering

They are mediums of communication, how we choose to communicate is up to us. That some people don't use it well doesn't mean it isn't helping democracy in other instances. It's like saying books aren't informative because tons of them are crappy. The crappy ones don't lessen the value of good books.

Social media is used to spread pop culture but it is also used positively. The potential definitely helps democracy.

Fri, 2014-09-26 11:32

Slumberjack

The Left and the New Media - The Chomsky Paradox

Quote:
What Chomsky could do not was to teach us how to stop reading the New York Times. As a result, thousands of activists around the globe reach for the Times (or the Guardian or the Washington Post) each morning, with red pens in hand, begin marking it up and grinding the enamel off their teeth.