Party websites

Electronic communication for virtual

democracy?

Lecture at University of Wollongong

Øyvind Kalnes
 What should democracy be about?
Competitive democracy: Provide
meaningful political alternatives for
voters in free elections held at regular
intervals (Joseph Schumpeter)


Unilateral communication

Participative (or discourse) democracy:

Provide means for involvement in the
public discussion and formulation of
policies. (Jürgen Habermas)

Multilateral communication
«I have little or no interest in politics»

....and Australia?

Source: European Social Survey

 CAN VIRTUAL PARTIES FIX THE
DEMOCRATIC DEFECIT?

Political parties as the organizations that provide the

competition and the participation in modern
democracy.

– The development and adoption of ICT

– Does the individual web sites seek to enhance the
opportunities for participation and discourse?
– Does the aggregate of party websites enhance the
competition within the party system?

Study of Norwegian parties’ presence on the web

(anyone visited a Australian party website?)
Technological factors and organizational learning
(according to the Gartner Group)
Internet access in % of age group
Party strength (indicators)
 The virtual parties
Technology itself obviously a necessary condition, but


The timing and priority of virtualization are negatively
affected by party strength (i.e degree of institutionalization)


Focus on participation (i.e. unilateral information delivery
vs. multilateral communication) is strongest among new
left parties, and during the introductory phase.


... but there is a convergence over time towards unilateral
information delivery as a consequence of organizational
learning and late starters catching up.
Convergence at the plateau of
productivity?
• Despite near universal web access and party presence on the
web, the average net surfer do not use the internet for
political purposes or visit party web sites.
2. Compared to the traditional mass media (TV, radio and
newspapers) party web sites are marginal as sources of
information for ordinary voters
3. But the web sites are important as information banks and
sources of information and promotional material for party
members and journalists.
4. ... and among the 56% (in 2005) that decides during the
camapign, voters under 44 are predominant and those most
likely (18-28%) to visit party websites during campaigns.
 Old-fashioned political ducks with a new supplementary
instrument in the competition for votes
..Many accounts seems to
start from wildly unrealistic
premises based on the
assumption that the Internet
can somehow transform old-
fashioned political ducks into
flawless direct democracy http://www.dna.no/
swans (Pippa Norris 2000)

Next question:
Has the internet changed the
premises for this competition,
making it easier to campaign
for new political alternatives?. http://www.liberal.org.au/ http://www.alp.org.au/

What's your judgement?

THE PARTY SYSTEM ON THE WEB
Actual party system:
• Financing and media attention skewed in favor of
established parties,
• But media attention also in favour of the new left at
the expense of new right and old left

For a small party that has great problems getting media exposure,
communication with the voters through the Internet is very important.
Through the Net the party can reach all voters that seek an alternative to
the major parties. …..
The Internet gives the party an opportunity to go thoroughly into - and
explain for interested voters and party members - the background for
the political initiatives making media headlines.
(Party Treasurer of the Democrats 2005).
 Some indicators
Indicator Data Effect?
Web site All parties in Parliament and most (14 out of 17) +
of the non-parliamentary parties
Domain name All parties in the sample had own domain name, +
referring to party name in full or abbreviated form
(http://www.partyname.no/).
Directory listings Directory pages for "Norwegian political parties" +
lists all of the parties in the sample on first or
second page
Linked to Sites of larger parties are more frequently linked +
to, but difference is smaller than expected

Searched for Searches for political parties roughly followed the 0

same pattern as normal voting behaviour.

Actual hits Roughly as voting, but some do significantly ?

better/worse than expected. But all score very low!
Media and voter attraction in Norway 2005
Web reach and votes
 CONCLUSIONS
Success in Web 1.0?
Ten years of learning have led to a remarkable convergence,
towards a unilateral and highly professional model (for those
that can afford it), ..

…. but what about democracy?

Parties have yet to realise the potential of the new
technology i.e. reach the platform of productivity, if
participatory democracy is the yardstick.
When parties recreate mirror images of themselves and try to
“do business as usual”, they simply do not manage to attract
and channel political activity and interest as they have done
in “the real world
Web 2.0 may be a frightening prospect of another
painful hype cycle. Parties appear as confused as in 1997.

Labour Party candidate on Web 2.0
 PARTIES ON FACEBOOK
PRESEN MEMBE W TOPIC POST
MAIN PARTY (Central) T RS ALL S S
Conservatives * 1 417 97 5 18
Progress Party 1 56 10 0 0
Socialist Left Party 1 218 11 3 4
Labour Party * 2 506 27 1 13
Liberals 1 40 0 0 0
Christian People's Party 1 44 0 1 3
Centre Party 1 90 1 0 0
Red Electoral Alliance 1 176 19 4 22
Democrats 1 48 0 1 2
Coast Party 0 0 0 0 0
Pensioners' Party 0 0 0 0 0
 PARTIES ON YOUTUBE
CHANNE SUBSCRIB VIDE COMMEN
MAIN PARTY (Central) L VIEWS ERS OS TS
Conservatives (1) * 0 0 0 0
Young Conservatives 1 3080 12 10 22
Progress Party 0 0   0 0
Socialist Left Party 0 0 0 0 0
Oslo SLP 1 64 2 2 0
Labour Party 1 7953 72 47 53
Labour Youth 1 800 12 23 6
Liberals 1 29 2 3 0
Young Liberals 1 694 2 27 39
Christian People's Party 0 0 0 0 0
Centre Party 1 112 1 1 0
Red Electoral Alliance 1 281 6 48 23
Democrats 0 0 0 0 0
Coast Party 0 0 0 0 0
Pensioners' Party 0 0 0 0 0