Peruvian communication theorist Rosa Maria Alfaro asserts that “today the media constitute a crucial source of civic education and legitimization of democratic power. Political elites legitimize themselves or join dissident discourses through their interactions with newspapers, magazines, radio and television. Notions of political authority, political values and general understanding of a nation’s political institutions are consolidated through the daily programmes of the mass media and particularly via news. The national and international agenda emerge from daily mass media processes of production and consumption. Both the concept and feeling of nation and of the world are also articulated in the production and consumption of the media.
In a democratic country like South Africa, the internet has become more informative, and social media has become a platform for freedom of expression. This means that citizens of South Africa are allowed access to information regarding parliamentary affairs and can participate in political debate and governance via the use of Social media as well as print and broadcast media. There are many ways the government communicates with the public using social media, especially during elections where the voice and input of the public is required the most.
Access to information is essential to the health of democracy for at least two reasons. First, it ensures that citizens make responsible informed choices rather than acting out of ignorance or misinformation. Second, information serves a checking function by ensuring that elected representatives uphold their oaths of office and carry out the wishes of those elected them. In some societies, an antagonistic relationship between media and government represents a vital and healthy element of fully functioning democracies. In post-conflict or ethnically homogenous societies such conflictual, tension-ridden relationship may not be appropriate, but the role of the press to disseminate information as a way of mediating between the state and all faces of civil society remains critical.
Most notably, Article 19 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human rights states “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”. While media is considered by USAID to be a part of the civil society arena, it is well known that media overlaps other functional areas of democracy and governance. For example, support for media may yield results in governance activities, particularly those related to decentralization, anti-corruption, and citizen participation in the policy process. The rule of law may be further institutionalized by support of an independent media that keeps a check on the judiciary, reports on the courts and promotes a legal enabling environment suitable for press freedom. Free and fair elections conducted through transparent processes require a media sector which gives candidates equal access, and reports the relevant issues in a timely, objective manner. If the media is to have any meaningful role in democracy, then the ultimate goal of media assistance should be to develop a range of diverse mediums and voices that are credible, and to create and strengthen a sector that promotes such outlets [Heywood 2013].
Credible outlets enable citizens to have access to information that they need to make informed decisions and to participate in society. A media sector supportive of democracy would be one that has a degree of editorial independence, is financially viable, has diverse and plural voices, and serves the public interest. The public interest is defined as representing a plurality of voices both through a greater number of outlets and through a greater number of outlets and through the diversity of views and voices reflected within one outlet. This therefore means that the public now relies on the media more heavily than before.
The media has traditionally been said to promote democracy in two key ways: by fostering public debate and political engagement, and by acting as a ‘public watchdog’ to check abuses of power. The capacity to provide a civic forum in which meaningful and serious political debate can take place is often viewed as the key democratic role of the media. The virtue of this is that better informed citizens with more independent and considered views will be more politically engaged. The media are therefore agents of political education. Indeed, the media may have largely replaced formal representative institutions, such as assemblies, parliaments and local councils, as arenas for the dialogue, debate and deliberation that are the very stuff of democratic politics. This has happened because the media are better suited to this role than are traditional representative bodies [Heywood 2013].
In addition to offering the public perhaps its only meaningful opportunity to watch politicians in action, the media provide a forum for the expression of a much wider range of viewpoints and opinions than is possible with in representative institutions composed only of elected politicians. Thus, academics and scientists, business leaders and trade union bosses, and representatives of interest groups and lobbyists of all kinds are able to express views and engage in public debate through the mechanism of media. Not only do the media substantially widen the range of views and opinions expressed in political debate, but they also present debate and discussion in a way that is lively and engaging for the general public, devoid of the formality, even stuffiness, that characterizes the exchanges that take place in assemblies and council chambers around the world [Heywood ]. This is also possible through the use of e-democracy, which refers to the use of computer-based technologies to enhance citizens engagement in democratic processes. This therefore reflects the rise of e-politics in creating an information or network society [Heywood 2013] Examples of e-democracy include the following:
- Online voting(e-voting) in elections or referendums.
- Online petitions (e-petitions) organized by government or other bodies.
- The use of ICT to publicize, organize, lobby or fundraise (e-campaigning).
- Accessing political information, news and comments via websites, blogs (web logs) and so on.
- The use of interactive television or social networking sites to allow citizens to engage in political debate and, possibly policy-making.
- The use of mobile phones and social media to organize popular protests and demonstrations.
Although the internet has been used in campaigning since the mid-1900s, particularly in the USA, it became prominent during Barack Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign. Obama’s team used forums such as Facebook and MySpace to build relationships particularly with supporters and would-be supporters aged 18-29, also encouraging the spread of wider networks of support via the webside MyBarackObama.com [Heywood].
In conclusion, it is therefore seen that the internet is an improved tool for political participation and is seen to be the cause of the successes of various politicians. This essay has discussed how the role of new media maintains a democracy, by the implementation of online governance for citizens.
Bibliography:
Center for Democracy and Governance. The Role of Media in a Democracy: A Strategic Approach. 2009. Can be accessed on: www.usaid.gov/sites/default/...200sbc.pdf [accessed on 15 September] Heywood A, 2013. The Palgrave Macmillan Politics, fourth edition. Palgrave Macmillan New York.
