I chose to reflect on Chapter 3 Politics: Deliberation, Mobilization, and Networked Practices of Agitation. I specifically chose this chapter because I was interested in seeing how they percieved the future of politics. I know what you're thinking, "Yuck, Politics?!" Trust me, I thought the same thing. But the sad truth is, being familiar with politics helps us to better understand why things are the way they are, how they got that way, and what we can do about it! The good side to any democracy is that the people (however small) have a voice. If you want change, take strides to become a politician and an agent of change! It is possible. What irks me is when people get their political knowledge from a single source (i.e. the news) and think that they are political savants. At the moment out political system is quite corrupt ( I am sure most people agree!) and mostly ruled by while, older men. It is my wish that technology influence politics in a way that can level the playing field and make it more accessible and understandable for the everyday citizen.
The first topics brought up is the "electronic town hall" where people can speak directly with a representative(p.77). I think this sounds like a great idea; if the elected officials respond. But, I have the feeling that they would very rarely or not at all. The example of the public sphere that was posted was in order to determine what to do about the 9/11 site was interesting. Eight Hundred Americans were asked and through "structured, guided discussion and deliberation, participants contributed their positions to decision makers" (p.79). I think that this was a very honorable and compassionate way to include many people in the decision making process.
The only thing that truly concerned me was the alarming amount of times that the chapter described the internet as 'convivial.' I am not going to lie, I didn't even know what that word meant. But I don't think that I should take up nearly 19 pages on explaining how 'friendly' ( I looked it up! )the internet is. I think that anonymity of some sites can create a 'friendly' and guilt free atmosphere but I don't think that I would use the adjective 'friendly' to describe the whole internet. Sure it is low-cost (in general p.81) and collaborative but it is difficult to control or censor. Now, I don't say this to sound like the Chinese Government. I think that some parts of the internet should be managed. I am a firm believer that there should be some responsibility on managing those horrible comments or bullying remarks that are posted on various sites by teens. Maybe if someone types derogatory or inappropriate language it should be censored, and deleted. I understand that this may violate freedom of speech; but I think that people have the freedom to be jerks in their homes, but more than they should in public places like the grocery store.... or the internet!
Forgive me, I know that there are flaws in my argument, but consider the other side of the story too. Children (under 18) don't have the same freedoms as adults. While under the responsibility of their parents, they must abide by their rules and the rules schools. Their freedoms are limited already... but in the end it may save a life.
Varnelis, K.(Ed.).(2008). Networked Publics. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Nicole,
ReplyDeleteI was smiling and almost laughing when I read your third sentence on the subject of politics. Nothing stirs up the conversation soul like the subjects of politics and religion. After reviewing chapter 3 the two most important questions to me where:
1. Has the Internet transformed politics in any way?
2. Does the Internet form a new public sphere?
For question # 1. In my opinion, yes the internet has transformed politics because it allows politicians a means to get their message out to potential voters quicker than traditional means. Traditionally, politicians would deliver speeches, radio or T.V. broadcasts, or you would read about them in newspapers. Today that message can get deliver almost instantly to people via their PCs, tablets, and mobile phones. Some smartphone have the ability to do functions as PCs and tablets. According to (Nielsen, 2014), “171.5 million people 71% own such a device.” That means politicians can hand deliver their message.
For question #2. Yes, the internet has form a new public sphere. This allows a platform where individuals can communicate back with their political parties while expressing their own point of views and concerns. Which clearly coincide with Jurgen Habermas, “who defined the term, public sphere as a network for communicating information and points of view in which democratic deliberation take place” (Varnelis, 2008).
Derek J
References:
Nielsen. (2014). Mobile Millennials: Over 85% of Generation Y Owns Smartphones. Retrieved from Nielsen: http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2014/mobile-millennials-over-85-percent-of-generation-y-owns-smartphones.html
Varnelis, K. (2008). Networked Publics. Cambridge: MIT Press.
As Derek is laughing...so am I ... all valid points Nicole ..., all valid. No one has the opportunity to know this first hand other than myself. I have been elected to office before and it seemed as if the first time in '09 it wasn't as much of a bully pit as it is now.... However, I was just endorsed as a candidate to run for my town's supervisor. Such an honor, but Nicole you are right the social network world has made it easy to disseminate information, whether true or false about anyone. And so long as you are an elected official, you rise to a different level of being attacked. So long as I am out there running openly for an elected office, I am able to be attacked a little bit more than the normal citizen....Lovely, however I do feel that there should be more censoring on the web. There is so much commotion going on on the internet and nearly no oversight.
ReplyDeleteWhat I have noticed in the Political sphere and it lends credence to Varnelis, is that blogging has truly shaped the atmosphere of politicians. Let's face it if you have followers, they will read your stuff and if you sound smart, they will believe you. So in essence, you can be the master of your destiny in the world of politics, providing you stay above the fray. As I have always said, 'the high road can be a very lonely place!'.
Nothing catches the attention as fast as politics. I think it a smart move for politicians to use the internet to further their political agenda. Consumers must be smart enough not to believe everything they hear or read. Varnelis describes the Internet as "a convival medium with a greater scope for freedom, autonomy, creativity, and collaboration" (p. 82). However, the internet is also a medium used to distribute falsehood, oppress the weak and prey on the young. All things require an understanding of the good that can be gained and the harm that can be caused.
ReplyDelete