In a study considering the usage of internet since the late 1990’s, moving to 73%

of the Americans in 2003 using the internet and 65% of them having access to the
net from homes (USC, 2004).

According to a survey that was done, 75% of people believe that internet
enhances democracy while 25% says it doesn’t according to debate.org website.
Yet, these 25% have not only an opinion, but also argument with evidences
defending their point of view.

Knowing that any argument will be divided with people with and others against,
both sides should have logical quarrels to defend their opinion, turning it later on
to a fact if proven. Claims need backing, warranties, and grounds to be created
and collected for the claim to be considered reasonable enough to be discussed.

Refusing the” Resolved: that internet enhances democracy”, a first argument

spins around the gatekeepers that control the flow of information through the
web channels deciding what type of information should be published and what to
be banned. Thus, not all expressed opinions are treated respectfully. Some are
deleted, and others are banned, while others are also edited, forming the worst
type of freedom of expression ever.

Another contest is concerned about virtual sphere of politics and the opportunity
for equal access for all citizens to the net for them to express their opinion freely.
Which democracy can be discussed in the term of inequality between people
where some can reach all sites while others don’t even know how to access the
internet world? Doesn’t this disparity enhance individualism rather than
democracy of free expression? (Golding 2000: 176)

Third question can be asked about if internet really enhances democracy. Isn’t it
true that most offline and online sources of information are owned or at least
sponsored by politicians? What type of democracy can be tendered for people
within the area of one media channel if it is endeavored in one defined direction?
What about the economic section? Is it democratic that some countries enjoy
open-net trade that facilitates the trading process while others aren’t even
connected to the easy access operating means of business?

Moving to the education section, is it democratic that communities can

effortlessly reach every single educational update while others live in literacy all
because of the net banners?

Tewksbury & Althaus (1999) discuss that new net users don’t usually care about
getting to search political issues posted on the online magazines front pages for
example. This gives another evidence that internet doesn’t always enhance
democracy, because not all people share opinions neither they have same
backgrounds in surfing the net.

Not to forget, that the international lows that are used to assure transparency are
not always applied correctly, thus Asian and African countries for example, which
are less powerful than the American and European countries don’t benefit from
the full coverage of free flow of the information and the ability of the free
expression right for citizens on an equal base for all.

Marxist theory is one of the most powerful premises that discuss the idea that
refutes the hypothesis of internet enhancing democracy. Shanti Kalathil and Tyler
Boas (2003) had their book “Open Network, Closed Regimes” that deeply offers
great argument about the previously discussed issue.

Tewksbury & Althaus (1999) suggest that exposing the political issues in the same
level of importance with other types of information leads people to separate from
the political issues and thus it is considered another disturbing factor that internet
works against democracy not with.

Taylor Owen wrote his book, “Disruptive Power” <the crisis of the state in the
digital age> which discusses the one panel flow of information, and the changes
that took place with the entrance of the internet, where people now can express
their opinion, and thus two ways of communication was created. They are not
only receiving information, but they are sharing their own even if it opposes the
political régime or forms a misleading opinion stream. Therefore, this would
deceive the concept of democracy itself. Sometimes, giving power to the wrong
people would lead to negative outcomes. The power of the word is like a double
sword if used in the wrong way.

John Medearis discusses a similar idea in his book “Why Democracy is

Oppositional”. He enlightens the idea that internet gives the people who are
against the political regime the power to form social movements and connect to
interact widely against the established democratic order.

References:

http://mikeb.inta.gatech.edu/uploads/papers/internet.democ.pdf

http://eprints.lse.ac.uk/1011/1/CriticaldebatesTODAY.pdf

http://mikeb.inta.gatech.edu/uploads/papers/internet.democ.pdf

https://www.utwente.nl/bms/vandijk/research/itv/itv_plaatje/Digital%20Democr
acy-%20Vision%20and%20Reality.pdf

Nadia Urbinati, Representative Democracy: Principles and Genealogy(Chicago:

University of Chicago Press, 2006).

Manuel Castells, “Information Technology and Global Capitalism,” in Will Hutton

and Anthony Giddens, eds., On the Edge: Living with Global Capitalism (London:
Jonathan Cape, 2000).
Gregory Ferenstein, “Peter Thiel’s Radical Political Vision,” Daily Beast,
www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/10/01/peter-thiel-s-radicalpolitical-
vision.html.