Parties, Candidates and Citizens On-Line - Åbo Akademi

“Not only does this form of participation have greater educative effects for
the individual, it also strengthens the social and personal links without which
democracy becomes simply a set of purely formal procedures. In turn social
ties strengthen a willingness to compromise and strengthen the ability to offer
alternatives on policies […] In short, face-to-face contact produces `rich talk´
rather than formal debate, which is a highly desirable outcome. […] Surely,
though, popular debate and discussion, however conducted, have certain
characteristics in common which make them recognizably the same. […] Both
electronic and face-to-face debates can be regarded therefore as variants of
direct democracy…” (Budge, 1996: 29-30)
As a counterweight to the optimistic mobilization theory, an essentially opposite point of
view regarding internet politics has emerged. This cautious, sometimes even pessimistic,
approach is called the reinforcement theory. The basic argument inherent in the
reinforcement theory is that the revival of political participation through the web, argued
by the proponents of the mobilization theory, is highly questionable (Davis, 1999: 2;
Norris, 1999b: 72-73; Norris, 2001b: 217- 219). Politics on the internet will more likely
only attract the politically ‘converted’ citizens (e.g. Norris, 2001d).
Generally, there are many reasons to be cautious when considering the
implications of a possible shift into electronic politics. Pessimistically, Bimber (2000: 332)
writes that the increasing flow of information and political outlets provided by the web,
are in no way guaranteed to save democracy. On the contrary, it is very plausible that
citizens’ participation is further fragmented into small communities with little in common
(c.f. Barber, 1998). Dahl (1989: 520) also calls for caution regarding the electronic
discussion boards. Concerning these, he states, there are no guarantees that electronic
participation increases citizens’ political knowledge. Moreover, he points out that the new
technology might even be abused by those in power, and thus works in contradiction to
the ideal of direct democracy. In addition, Budge mentions that there still remains much
uncertainty concerning the quality of electronic debates, an uncertainty which makes
direct comparisons with physical conversations impossible. Strandberg (2003) found
indications of poor discussion quality in electronic debates; on some discussion boards
the debates are negative in tone, if not even antagonistic (c.f. Bentivegna, 1998; Löfgren,
2001). Thus, one can question the discussion boards’ ability to create “strong democratic
conversations” as Barber (1984) hopes for.
Concerning the citizens’ on-line activity, further objections to the visions of the
mobilization theory can be put forth. Regarding this, proponents of the reinforcement
theory have pointed at two causes for the internet’s failure to mobilize the masses. Firstly,
the technological resources required for internet usage are unevenly divided. Globally
there exists a divide in internet penetration between the rich industrialized nations of the
northern hemisphere and the poor developing countries of the southern hemisphere
148