Ethics in the Information Age                     Discussion Project: Democracy and the Internet 

Introductory comment:

Most people who theorize (or just think hard) about democracy recognize that a vibrant democratic society requires more than free and fair elections.  It requires what is sometimes called a ‘public sphere’ in which citizens can discuss and debate issues, learn what others are experiencing and thinking, and acquire the information and ideas they need to vote wisely.  When people ask whether the Internet is good or bad for democracy, they are mostly asking whether it helps or hinders our ability to have a robust and healthy ‘public sphere’ in which citizens can deliberate together.  Part of this, but only a part, is our ability to find accurate information about matters of public importance.  Another part is our ability to engage with other people and talk about what that information means and what we should do about it.

In Chapter 6 of The Wealth of Networks, Jochai Benkler lists four ‘desiderata’ (desirable characteristics) for a democratic public sphere:

1.  Universal Intake -- (Everybody can participate, at least to the extent of contributing opinions/observations).
2.  Filtering for Political Relevance -- (There needs to be some mechanism for weeding out the inputs that are politically irrelevant, not appropriate for public concern, not part of the proper scope of politics.)
3.  Filtering for Accreditation -- (There needs to be some mechanism for sorting the inputs in terms of their reliability, weeding out the nutcases and the ‘fake news,’etc.)
4. Independence from Government Control

He also insists that the relevant baseline for our assessment of the Internet should not be some imaginary Utopia where truth and reason reign supreme, but the ‘industrialized mass media’ of the 20th century, where a few major media companies dominated the public discourse and most people had no way to make their voices heard.

 Discuss and try to agree on answers to the following (Draw on the reading and on your own thoughts and ideas)

1.  What reasons can be given for thinking that the Internet will be (or has been) good for democracy? 

2.  What reasons can be given for thinking that the Internet will be (or has been) bad for democracy?

3.  What is your overall assessment of the impact of the Internet on the quality of our democracy?

4. What policies, rules or laws could make it more likely that the Internet will make a positive contribution to a 'healthy' public information system?