New media and
Democracy
Does the Internet make any real difference to democracy?
GrahamYoung Executive Director National Forum
3rd June, 2005
Who am I?

http://graham.nationalforum.com.au/
What motivates me ?
And…
What is Democracy?

“…government of the people, by the people, and for
the people…” – Abraham Lincoln Speech, 19 Nov 1863, dedicating
the national cemetery on the site of the Battle of Gettesburg

“Democracy means government by discussion but it
is only effective if you can stop people talking.” Clement Attlee Anatomy of Britain (Anthony Sampson), ?1960

“…democracy is the worst form of Government
except all those other forms that have been tried
from time to time.” – Winston Churchill Speech, Hansard 11
November (1947), col. 206
“System of Government where decisions are made on the
basis of a vote of all those belonging to that unit.”

It involves:






A problem or need
Discussion/Debate
Resolution of the discussion into a proposition or series
of propositions
Determination of a majority position on the proposition
Consent of the governed
Action
The actors are:






Legislators
Individuals
Community
Media
Courts
Police and other enforcement agencies
What is e-Democracy?
How is it different?

“The medium is the message. This is merely to say that the
personal and social consequences of any medium...result
from the new scale that is introduced into our affairs by each
extension of ourselves or by any new technology.”
McLuhan, Marshall Understanding Media, Ch. 1

“Backing into the future”
and the Internet
Graham Meikle Future Active Media Activism
Democratic “market” 50 years ago







Homogenous/ Mass Market
Loyal/Tribal
Hierarchical
Relatively Passive
Not mobile
Community defined by geography
Decentralised and small scale
Democratic “market” now







Differentiated/Niche Markets
Volatile
Flat
Demanding
Mobile
Community defined by interest
Large scale
Technologies that have effected
the political market
What is e-Democracy again?

The use of Internet-based technologies in the
democratic process as a means of
communication, discussion, organisation,
influence, or decision making.

It is NOT “e-Government” which is the
implementation of government administration
via the use of Internet-based technologies.
Paradigms of e-Democracy






Direct or plebiscitary democracy
Online Communities
Government use of online techniques as a means of
gauging public opinion
Online public engagement in policy deliberation
e-Activism
Electronic News Services
(Points 1-4 from Bowling Together:Online Public Engagement in Policy
Deliberations Hansard Society http://www.hansardsociety.org.uk/)
How is internet likely to change
politics?






Increase market differentiation
Make electors more volatile
Further flatten hierarchies
More demanding
Increase numbers of communities of interest
Scale will be less relevant
What are the advantages of eDemocracy?






Cheap to produce, publish and distribute material
Interactive – vertically and horizontally
Low barriers to entry and involvement
Ability to target market
Lessens effect of geographical, sexual, physical and other
disadvantage
Able to be quickly responsive to events
What are the disadvantages of eDemocracy?







Clutter – too many sites
Lack of authority
Anarchic
Difficult to find and classify participants
Difficult to talk to the uncommitted
Digital Divide
Security and privacy of information
How are governments meeting the
challenge?








Victorian Electronic Democracy Inquiry
NSW Community Builders
Queensland Government e-Petitions
Senate will accept electronic petitions
Webcasting of federal parliament, hansard online
US Environmental Protection Agency - community
consultation with 1066 participants
English Parliament - bills up for scrutiny and comment
Government Online Directory (GOLD)
Democracy Online
EPA Project

Large number of people participated, creating complex
communication dynamics. (This involved 1,166 people from all over
the country. 40 to 60 3.43% to 5.16% posting each day).

Participants were highly satisfied with the process. (70%
rated as positive while only 9% rated as very or somewhat negative).

The process increased the number of voices heard, but
the voices were not necessarily new.
Democracy Online cont...



Communication was good, but many found it difficult to
participate.
Participants learned much, networked a little, and felt they
would have some influence on EPA policy and practice.
EPA accomplished its goal of garnering broader input
about what it does right and wrong. It also opened up
new lines of communication with the public, encouraged
a few more formal comments on the Public Involvement
Policy, and generated some public good will.
Features of government efforts





Tend to be only interactive to the stage of consultation
(Jensen). Not much conversational interactivity, or
“intercreativity” (Berners-Lee via Meikle)
Experimental
Tentative
Not user-focussed
Project based, not on-going
How are Australian politicians
meeting the challenge?






Email (70% according to Chen)
Online consultation (64% according to Chen)
40% support online voting and 30% opposed (Chen)
Political parties rate the Internet as equal or best medium
for getting their message out (Gibson and Ward)
Mostly static information (Gibson and Ward)
Amount of interactivity low. Prefer one-way
communication (Gibson and Ward)
But…




Helen Razer (ABC Presenter) couldn’t get one party, apart
from the Greens, to respond to her offer of assistance
during the last federal election
Liberal Party didn’t maintain its mailing list from its site
properly
Only online consultation ALP did for Hawke/Wran
Review was on a Labor 21(Carmen Lawrence site
apparently now defunct) and On Line Opinion
Prime Minister only responds to email via snail mail
How are interest groups meeting the
challenge?




e-Activism
Email (S 11, WEF, MAI)
Websites (www.cis.org.au,
http://www.hizbollah.org/english/frames/index_eg.htm)
Portals (http://www.oneworld.net/)
But...



Generally lack interactivity beyond the registrational
(Jensen)
Lack of Promotion /Visibility
Strategic expertise lacking
What are other groups doing?






Minnesota e-Democracies (http://www.edemocracy.org/)
Indymedia sites (http://indymedia.org/)
www.onlineopinion.com.au/domain
www.onlineopinion.com.au
BBC iCAN
e-Parliament
Meeting in the middle
Community






A problem or need
Discussion/Debate
Resolution of the discussion into
a proposition or series of
propositions
Determination of a majority
position on the proposition
Consent of the governed
Action
Government
What sort of public sphere

Jed Miller – Toward an Interactive Democracy
If citizens have become more engaged online, but remain isolated
in narrow beakers of single issues and circumscribed activities,
then the challenge for revitalising the public sphere is to create
cauldrons big enough to support deliberative activity on a large
scale, building on the power of compelling context, urgent popular
narratives and grassroots outreach to gather strangers, foster trust
and describe prospective outcomes that motivate participation.
National Forum
What is it?





Town Hall
Public Open Space
Shopping Centre/Market of Ideas
Producers’ coop
Project to combine discussion and action
National Forum
What are its benefits?





Combines discussion and action
Community Owned - public, advocacy groups,
research/policy groups, politicians and
governments.
Information rich context - peripheral vision
Order e-Democracy clutter
Give individuals and sites profile
Closing the loop




From chat to action
Submission to Victorian eDemocracy Inquiry
Background paper on petition sites
http://onlineopinion.com.au/petitions
Conclusion
Time required before new technology substantially
impacts on democracy:
 Radio - 40 years
 TV - 20 years
 Internet - ?
How?
 The medium really is the message
 Reinventing the Past