Archive for April, 2006
Shanthi and Taylor wrote: “The issue of the Internet’s impact on authoritarian regimes is a subset of the larger question of ICT use in developing country politics.
In reality, specific concrete actions are most important for the promotion of democracy, in both the technological and nontechnological sphere. ”
Rules are, first of all, constitutive expressions. They (often implicitly) tell us what exists, in what measure, and in what relation.
Also there are regulative rules. Often more formal and explicit, they regulate social behavior inside the structured, prescribed (constituted) reality by specifying guiding and sanctioning human activity in particular ways.
“Use of the Internet has both broadened and fragmented the contexts of communication. This is why the Internet can have a subversive effect on intellectual life in authoritarian regimes. But at the same time, the less formal, horizontal cross-linking of communication channels weakens the achievements of traditional media. This focuses the attention of an anonymous and dispersed public on select topics and information, allowing citizens to concentrate on the same critically filtered issues and journalistic pieces at any given time. The price we pay for the growth in egalitarianism offered by the Internet is the decentralised access to unedited stories. In this medium, contributions by intellectuals lose their power to create a focus.”
How does individual opinion aggregate to collective public opinion on the Net?