Can We Really Have an Online COMMUNITY?

The Internet could not only fully duplicate offline democratic procedures and outcome, but it could improve upon them. It would be much easier online than offline for millions not merely to gain information and to vote, but also to participate in deliberations and in instructing their chosen representatives.

The internet provides a venue for a community without borders, though how thick and cohesive a virtual community can become is debatable. With full disclosures of identity through online signatures and verification procedures, strong communities can be created and sustained.

NOTES TO PONDER: Can real, as opposed to virtual, relationships exist online? What holds people accountable to the identities they become online?

A Web of Confusion

Why is it that there are so many terribly designed web sites in our virtual universe? The answer lies in the fact that people just don't know any better. Our discussions have often times labeled so web sites as ridiculous because of their "mystery meat" and poor navigation. Especially in the case of mystery meat, web developers are trying to show off their technology. The same goes with implementing flash and other web enhancers. However, as the technology is constantly changing, people want to stay at the top of what is fresh. Often times just because it's fresh doesn't mean it's good. To top it all off, most people really don't know the difference between what is good and what is not; they cannot balance the implementation of flashy design and usability.

NOTES TO PONDER: Which is more important, impressing the viewers that come to your site with flashy technology (while running the risk of them getting a little lost on the site), OR having a very user friendly site that is less technologically advanced? What is the perfect balance between the two? Is there one? Can they exist in harmony(I admit, I got a little carried away with this one)?

The Evil of Special Interest

Both Bimber and many other political theorists have warned against the dangers of special interest groups. They, by definition, represent their own self interest instead of what is normatively right or wrong. With the implications of the internet, Bimber predicts a breakdown of traditional special interest groups and an increase in single issue oriented and much more fluid and fast changing groups. This is what he means when he says that groups lose "some of its dependence on stable public and private institutions." Interest groups will no longer be necessarily more successful because of a stable one-issue motivated list of contributors and professional lobbyists. The internet will level the playing field for communities that do not have the same professional, structured and singular interests.

NOTES TO PONDER: Is Bimber right about the future of special interests? With a breakdown in traditional special interest groups, what will happen to the campaign financing role that special interests once played?

Changing the Nature of Political Communication

Traditional political communication occurs from the top down with the media acting as the intermediary. With the strong hold of the media machine dwindling in the interactive world, especially with the boom of blogs, that traditional communication is changing. Though it may be too soon to speculate, more direct communication between politicos and citizens makes for not only a truer democracy, but a more interactive and efficient one.

NOTES TO PONDER: Did the traditional top down political communication arise because there were no interactive alternatives? What new role will the media machine play as the interactive world expands?

Politically Persuasive?

If the evidence does indicate, as we discussed in class, that the internet is persuasive, then this only reinforces the idea that internet is an effective marketing tool. But advertising and persuading on the internet is not just through web sites, but through banner ads, mentions in blogs, and getting your website at the top of searches on google and yahoo.

NOTES TO PONDER: Are candidates using banner ads and other forms of internet marketing? What makes these marketing forms more appealing to politicians?

Selling your web site

Web sites are geared to the distribution, buying, and selling of goods, ideas, and information. Designing a web site, as both the Nielsen and Flanders articles highlight, draws on the 22 Immutable Laws of Marketing. Many of the recommendations and criteria listed by both of these authors are not new ideas, simply print media and broadcast media marketing laws applied to the internet.

NOTES TO PONDER: How much of the expansion of the internet is simply a technological expansion of the marketing revolution?

A wanting future

For those of you who found the Bimber/Davis article interesting, I would like to share something Bimber wrote in another article.

Bimber claims that the Internet will not effect an American’s desire to be involved in the political process. Instead, interest groups and group-centered politics will intensify. Instead, interest groups and group centered politics will intensify. In his own words there are two assumption of accelerated pluralism: "neither the psychology nor sociology of political participation are altered by increasing the capacity of citizens to communicate" and "decreased transaction costs possible with the Net will enable more vigorous and frequent political efforts."

NOTES TO PONDER: If the Internet does not effect an American's want to be involved in politics does it at least make it easier? If a breakdown in traditional interest groups occurs, will the notorious political corruption of elected officals diminish or at least decrease?