Introduction
Contemporary generation has benefitted from marked technological developments, particularly access of varied information through social networking sites.
There have been innumerable advantages of social networking sites for personal or corporate benefits. Other public organizations and political parties recognize social networking sites’ abilities as proponents of democracy. To enable one to effectively support links between social networking sites and democracy, it is relevant to provide an effective definition of democracy as a form of government where citizens exercise rights to elect people who are regarded as capable of governing the rule of law. The current discourse hereby asserts that social networking sites do not conclusively initiate and enforce democracy for the following reasons: (1) they only incite civic participation; (2) due to the individualistic nature that the medium exemplifies; and (3) the ineffective ability to actively promote and encourage political action. As the term suggest, the predominant activity being served is the social interaction and exchange of information,
Social Networking Sites as Ineffective Initiators of Democracy
There are scholars who contend that social networking sites are ineffective initiators of democracy due to the inconclusive link to spur political activity. In the article written by Baumgartner & Morris (2010), the authors explored the participation of youths in engaging in political discourse through social networking sites. The findings of the study conducted by these authors revealed that there were not conclusive links between political engagement of youth and their use of social networking sites. Despite the anti-thetical outcome, the contention that social networking sites initiate and enforce democracy could be asserted as not duly supported. The fact that youths are able to access sites that promote political and democratic ideologies only confirm that these sites enable the access of relevant political information. The findings revealed that political advocacies promoted in these social networking sites were ineffective to persuade voting youths into democratic change.
Concurrently, social networking sites were not completely effective in initiating and enforcing democratic changes or political action due to the individualistic nature that the medium exemplifies. The findings from Baumgartner & Morris (2010) were corroborated by Fenton & Barassi (2011) as the authors noted that social networking sites could be perceived as problematic avenues for promoting political action predominantly due to self-centered logic; as compared to alternative media (newsletters, printed materials, television) which were identified as effective spaces enjoining collective action.
Another point validating that social networking sites are ineffective promoters of democratic ideals stem from their ineffective ability for political action and participation. In the study written by Zhang et al. (2010), the authors shared similar findings that social networking sites were found to “increase civic participation, but not political participation” (p. 75); thereby, indicating lack of viability in initiating and enforcing democracy. The rationale for the expected finding stemmed from the nature and purpose of social networking sites: to connect and maintain social relationships with family, friends, and acquaintances. As such, the social networking sites have been designed for purposes that seem to exclude the political or democratic agenda. As noted in various studies, other media were deemed more effective in promoting and enforcing democracy, such as: public speaking and political campaigns, television, broadsheets, and other campaign materials which could be closely evaluated, reviewed, and reflected on.
For a democracy to exist, there are characteristics or components that must exist. According to a lecture on democracy presented at Hilla University for Humanistic Studies, for democracy to exist, there are four elements that should be present: (1) the form of government was instituted through fair elections; (2) there is active participation of the people; (3) human rights of the citizens are protected; and (4) legal standards or rule of law applies to all (Stanford University 2004). Social networking sites have been known to provide the following advantages, to wit: sharing of personal messages and information; offering various individuals, groups, or even organizations to join in conversations; and allowing private or public organizations to deepen established relationships with clientele (public intimacy) (Merrill et al. 2011). As such, government institutions and political parties have recognized the ability of social networking sites to promote ideologies and advocate political change (Goodman 2011). In David Kirkpatrick’s book entitled The Facebook Effect: The Inside Story of the Company That Is Connecting the World, the author noted that social media “is altering the character of political activism, and in some countries it is starting to affect the processes of democracy itself” (Kirkpatrick 2011, p. 15).
The ability of social networking sites to promote democratic ideals have been initially supported through the ability of users to express their opinion and propose strategies for improving current political status. As asserted, some advocates and scholars who reviewed social networking sites relay the ability of creating new political possibilities, as “sites of democratic engagement and mass collaboration” (Fenton & Barassi 2011, p. 180). The experiences in Egypt and Tunisia proved that social networking sites had been instrumental in reaching out to people, promoting political action, and calling for urgent democratic change (Howard & Hussain 2011). The important aspect that Howard & Hussain (2011) noted was the fact that actual and real life tragedies which were documented through social networking sites, such as Facebook, provided the impetus for seeking democratic transformations. As such, from the experiences noted in the Arab world, it was evident that social networking sites initiated and enforced democratic ideologies (Howard & Hussain 2011). An evaluation of the experiences in Egypt and Tunisia would reveal that there were political unrest in these areas and people were actually calling for political change. As such, through contemporary social networking sites, the call to action proved to be effective, as greater numbers of people have been reached and were enjoined to support democratic stance.
Conclusion
After careful evaluation of the arguments, one hereby affirms that social networking sites do not conclusively initiate and enforce democracy. The applicability and effectivity of social networking sites in promoting democratic ideologies that call people to urgent action depends on the current political situation that besieges this type of media users. As such, the platform needed to initiate and enforce democratic ideologies or promote political endeavors require more effective media for collective review and synergetic action. The individual nature manifested in accessing and viewing social networking sites make these sites ineffective for evaluating political advocacies that require urgent changes or call people into democratic action.
References List
Baumgartner, J & Morris, J 2010, 'MyFace Tube Politics: Social Networking Websites and Political Engagement of Young Adults', Social Science Computer Review, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 24-44.
Fenton, N & Barassi, V 2011, 'Alternative Media and Social Networking Sites: The Politics of Individuation and Political Participation', The Communication Review, vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 179-196.
Goodman, S 2011, Social Media: The Use of Facebook and Twitter to Impact Political Unrest in the Middle East through the Power of Collaboration, San Luis Obispo: California Polytechnic State University.
Howard, P & Hussain, M 2011, 'The Role of Digital Media', Journal of Democracy, vol. 22, no. 3, pp. 35-48.
Kirkpatrick, D 2011, The Facebook Effect The Inside Story of the Company That Is Connecting the World, Simon & Schuster.
Merrill, T, Latham, K, Santales, R & Navetta, D 2011, Social Media: The Business Benefits May Be Enormous, But Can the Risks -- Reputational, Legal, Operational -- Be Mitigated?, viewed 18 May 2014, http://www.acegroup.com/us-en/assets/ace-progress-report-social-media.pdfStanford University, 2004, What is Democracy?, viewed 18 May 2014, http://www.stanford.edu/~ldiamond/iraq/WhaIsDemocracy012004.htm
Zhang, W, Johnson, T, Seltzer, T, & Bichard, O 2010, 'The Revolution Will be Networked: The Influence of Social Networking Sites on Political Attitudes and Behavior', Social Science Computer Review, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 75-92.
