Statement Jan-Hinrik Schmidt

Impulse statement, BSPC Seminar „Democracy in a changing media landscape“, 01.02.2021Why is the Internet good for democracy?Jan-Hinrik Schmidt, Leibniz-Institute for Media Research, HamburgWhen thinking about the implications of the Internet for democracy, we can adaptKranzberg’s first law of technology: „The Internet is neither good nor bad; nor is it neutral“(1). Whether the Internet strengthens or weakens participation and democracy; whether itsupports or counters populism and authoritarian forces; whether it erodes or stabilizes socialinqualities – all this is not inscribed in the hard- and software of digital networked media. Inreality, we will find examples for all these (and many more) mechanisms. For the sake of ourdiscussion, my following remarks will focus on the positive aspects of the Internet fordemocratic participation, and I will outline three reasons why the Internet is good fodemocracy.Reason #1: The Internet increases access to information on topics of collective interest.• The Internet transforms the „time and space“ of information in two ways: (a) We canaccess information any time and anywhere. (b) We can access information from allover the world, and from „now“ as well as from back in time.• Via the Internet, citizens can easily access an endless variety of information sources,ranging from journalistic media of different kinds over specialized expert media (e.g.arenas of scientific discourse) and collaborative knowledge collections (e.g. Wikpedia)to the personal publics of private blogs and social media accounts.• These different arenas operate with different rules for the selection, presentation andverification of information. In sum, they expand the pool and the diversity of availableinformation, and they erode the power of journalistic gatekeepers who were central toinformation flow in the age of mass media. (2)Reason #2: The Internet supports the articulation of opinions and preferences onpolitical isssues.• The free exchange of opinions on topics of broader relevance is a key element ofdemocracy. The Internet provides many options to engage in such debates, e.g. incomment sections of news outlets or on social media. While these spaces are typicallyrather unstructured, there are also many examples of more structured debate and1deliberation platforms, often on the local or regional level, e.g. online townhallsessions or citizens‘ consultations.• In addition, many citizens use the Internet to express the preferences on certain topicsvia online petitions. While some petition platforms have only rudimentary checks forthe „seriousness“ of the concern and the signatures, others are run by the officialpetition offices of parliaments, providing direct access to political procedures andcollectively binding decisions.Reason #3: The Internet decreases the transaction costs for coordinated action towardscommon goals.• All democracies rely on „collective action“, i.e. on the collaboration of citizenstowards shared goals. The Internet provides technological means to encourage andmobilize people to work towards such shared goals, as well as the tools to coordinateactions and organizational activities across time and space. (3)• Collective action usually relied on (or tended towards) the permanent, coordinated andstrategic organisation of interests. Digital technologies support another mode whichtends more towards dynamic and networked cooperation. Examples of this„connective action“ (4) are new global movements such as „Fridays for Future“, butalso the un-organized and fleeting „swarms“ or „crowds“ of users who temporarilyconnect in solidarity or outrage, but might easily disband after a short time.References and additional information(1) Kranzberg, Melvin (1986): Technology and History: ‘Kranzberg’s Laws’. In:Technology and Culture. 27 (3), 1986, 544–560.https://www.jstor.org/stable/3105385.(2) Schmidt, Jan-Hinrik (2018): Social Media [German only]. 2nd edition. Wiesbaden:Springer VS. https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9783658194543(3) Jungherr, Andreas / Gonzalo Rivero / Daniel Gayo-Avello (2020): Retooling Politics.How Digital Media are Shaping Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/retooling-politics/(4) Bennett, W. Lance / Alexandra Segerberg (2012): The logic of connective action.Digital media and the personalization of contentious politics. In: Information,Communication & Society 15 (5), 739–768.https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1369118X.2012.670661.2