Particularly in the area of the internet as a medium of information dissemination, this question of freedom is becoming increasingly relevant and timely.  Recently the US Congress took action to nullify the net neutrality order issued by the FCC earlier this year.  Part of the problem is that net neutrality isn’t a cut and dry issue, on either side of the political aisle legislators are influenced by corporate interests.  At the same time however, the issue isn’t purely one of economic gain and clientelism.  As evidenced in the attempts of authoritarian regimes around the world to control new media or in the United States reactions to the WikiLeaks scandals, there is significant political interest in controlling these venues of information.

For many, especially in the developed world, these issues tend to rest on the sidelines.  Seen primarily as issues of business and corporate interests, the impact of media consolidation on governance is rarely been investigated.  It is certainly worth asking however, just what impact corporate monopolization of the media is currently having and might potentially have in the future, on manipulating the information the public has access to and thus influencing the processes of governance.  In assisting nations in the development of democratic governance this question of access to information via a free press is a critical one, and one has to wonder just who is empowered by the current model of private ownership.

Other

The United States was not going to play a leading role in implementing the no-fly zone just up until the moment someone implemented it.

Why do I feel like I’ve seen this movie before and I know how it’s going to end? Look, I have no problem if outsiders want to intervene in Libya, I just wish that the (US-trained and US-armed) militaries in the region were taking more of a role here. Is that really too much to ask? (Go Qatar! Four whole planes? Wow, thanks for the support!) At a minimum, if the Arab League is not going to help enforce the no fly zone they say they support, is it too much to ask for them to keep there mouths shut when someone takes them up on their offer?

The main reason I am against the US taking an active role in enforcing the no fly zone without active support from Arab governments is because I don’t want the blame to fall on the US government if the whole operation goes pear-shaped. I really don’t want to be having a conversation a year from now about how Gaddafi wasn’t any worse than Dictator X and the only reason the US is in Libya is for the oil.

Other

…the easiest step America could take to deal a blow to Arab autocracy would be to stop selling weapons to Arab autocrats that they turn around and fire on their people.

Other

Here’s the disconnect: it’s the same party.

Other

Other

Other

[Obama's] having grown up in Kenya, his view of the Brits, for example, very different than the average American…But then if you think about it, his perspective as growing up in Kenya with a Kenyan father and grandfather, their view of the Mau Mau Revolution in Kenya is very different than ours because he probably grew up hearing that the British were a bunch of imperialists who persecuted his grandfather.

Umm…okay. I’m not quite sure what Huck is getting at here. Not to put too fine a point on it, but Kenya isn’t the only country that ever fought a liberation movement against the mighty British Empire. Nor are the Kenyans the only colonists that felt persecuted by the British colonial apparatus. Lots of people who lived in Britain’s colonies felt this way and some even fought successful rebellions against the mother country…such as those living in what we call today the United States of America! So if Huck is trying to say that rebelling against Britain is somehow an un-American activity, what, exactly, would constitute an American activity? Huck might want to check out a rather important document in US history called “The Declaration of Independence” and rethink his position. By the way, since when did the GOP become pro-colonialism?

Other

Other

Social Media, Governance, and Political Reform

Over the past few years, many technophiles, activists, and political observers have been lauding the potential of social media platforms such as Facebook, SMS, Twitter, and YouTube to improve governance and foment political change. To date, we possess largely anecdotal data on the impact of new media and technologies on political reform. For example, many argue that Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube have played critical roles in organizing the recent protests in Egypt, Iran, Moldova, and Tunisia. Moreover, anecdotal evidence suggests that cell phone technologies can play an instrumental role in revealing electoral fraud by improving election monitoring and reporting techniques. Yet, in spite of the anecdotal evidence that supports these developments and their use in specific instances, there is a dearth of empirical analysis on the subject. We lack studies that trace the causal impact of these technologies on political reform and improved governance. As a result, a number of open questions remain. Some areas that mandate more serious inquiry are the following:

• Evidence of Political Change. While we know that social media can play an important role in publicizing political activities such as protests, do we have evidence that such actions have led to substantive political change? Is it possible to develop a set of indicators to more effectively gauge the impact of new technologies and media on questions of political change?
• Technology and Governance. That social media can help coordinate large and discrete activities, such as protests and election observation, is clear. Is there any evidence that these technologies can help to improve day-to-day governance and improve political accountability? Moreover, as a transparency instrument, mobile governance relies on outflows of information from citizens to each other, and to governments and NGOs. Therefore it is important to consider how citizens can be persuaded to adopt such technology. What incentives do citizens have to participate in mobile governance, and how can new technologies be employed to complement advocacy efforts already underway?
• Questioning Access and the Digital Divide. Many social media technologies, such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, require access to functional Internet connections, however most people in developing countries lack access to such technologies. Rather, the most common technology in developing countries is a basic cell phone. Since the countries with the worst governance tend to be the poorest ones as well, how relevant are these advanced technologies to the people living in the countries with the worst forms of governance?
• Dictators versus Demonstrators. How quickly are regimes opposed to the spread of these technologies learning how to block them and/or employ them to suppress political dissent more effectively? For governance projects, technical questions relating to how data will be managed, and by whom, are worth considering. U.S. policy in this area also seems to work in contradictory ways: while the U.S. State Department has emerged as strong advocate for Internet freedom, the U.S. Department of Defense is building more effective programs to monitor the use of the Internet.
• Substitute versus Complement. Is social media a complement to direct political action or a substitute for it? Does it pose problems to the nature of direct political action today, and if so, how? Are people who use social media for political purposes more likely to take direct action, such as participating in a protest, or are virtual protests becoming substitutes for actual ones?

This issue of Democracy and Society will take a broad and analytical perspective to the impact of social media on political reform and improved governance. We seek to gain leverage not on anecdotal or circumstantial evidence of these impacts, but to demonstrate causal effect. We are also interested in exploring how we can employ such technologies away from large scale and discrete events, such as protests and elections, to more everyday issues of governance. Finally, we are interested in studies that illuminate how we can employ more modest technologies, such as SMS, to improve governance and catalyze political change.

Please email submissions to democracyandsociety [at] gmail [dot ] com. For additional information, please visit www.democracyandsociety.com or contact Deborah Brown or Ayesha Chugh at democracyandsociety [at] gmail [dot ] com.

Other

Unlike some, I certainly am not expecting a sudden surge of representative governance or for democratic rule to spring forth in the wake of these uprisings, particularly in Egypt or Yemen. On the other hand, pessimist or not, it’s hard not to be inspired by the recent activities.  Like many interested in international relations, I found myself wondering just what this means for the United States and other Western democracy building interests.  Unlike many, the best thing I can think to hope for is that Western policy-makers will take care with the situation and if possible stay out of it.

A popular rising of displeasure with authoritarian government certainly doesn’t equate a sudden desire for Western intervention.  If anything we might hope for the recent uprisings to provide a model of understanding future change in the region.

Other