IRMA-International.org: Creator of Knowledge
Information Resources Management Association
Advancing the Concepts & Practices of Information Resources Management in Modern Organizations

Deliberation, Participation, and "Pockets" of E-Democracy

Deliberation, Participation, and "Pockets" of E-Democracy
View Sample PDF
Author(s): Michael K. Romano (Western Michigan University, USA)
Copyright: 2010
Pages: 16
Source title: Politics, Democracy and E-Government: Participation and Service Delivery
Source Author(s)/Editor(s): Christopher G. Reddick (University of Texas at San Antonio, USA )
DOI: 10.4018/978-1-61520-933-0.ch012

Purchase

View Deliberation, Participation, and "Pockets" of E-Democracy on the publisher's website for pricing and purchasing information.

Abstract

Over the past few decades, researchers have attempted to unravel the puzzle of whether or not democracy exists online. According to recent evaluations (Norris, 2001; Hindman, 2009), while we find that the ‘Net may have the potential to help spread democracy through its open-endeddiscussions and mass appeal, it has deteriorated into an elite-level discourse due to what is commonly referred to as the “Long Tail” effect (Anderson, 2006) by researchers. This chapter reevaluates the popular theories of democracy online and calls into question the relevance of the question “does digital democracy exist?” Instead, I propose that digital democracy should be evaluated in terms of the sustainability of democratic tendencies within a given site, rather than its mere existence. I argue that scholars have jumped to the conclusion that the potential for democracy online has withered because they have focused too heavily on how a few key websites function to control the majority of traffic on the Web, and have not looked deeper into the infrastructure that is built within these websites and others to evaluate whether or not at a micro-level these sites act and public forums for the open deliberation of ideas and common questions. Instead of viewing democracy through a democratic lens based on liberal proceduralism, we should think of digital democracy existing in “pockets” – self-contained, community-based, democracy based on small, semi-autonomous, group dynamics.

Related Content

Jorge A. Ruiz-Vanoye, Ocotlán Díaz-Parra, Eric Simancas-Acevedo. © 2026. 26 pages.
Ricardo A. Barrera-Cámara, David H. Fuque-Ehuan, Alejandro Fuentes-Penna. © 2026. 36 pages.
Juan Manuel Xicoténcatl-Pérez, Jorge A. Ruiz-Vanoye, Ocotlán Díaz-Parra, José M. Liceaga-Ortiz-De-La-Peña, Julio César Ramos-Fernández, Rubén Oswaldo Hernández-Terrazas. © 2026. 28 pages.
Francisco R. Trejo-Macotela, Jaime Aguilar-Ortiz, Esther Citlali Garcia-Contreras. © 2026. 48 pages.
Francisco R. Trejo-Macotela, Uriel Amado Ramírez-Hernández, Daniel Robles-Camarillo, Edgar López-López. © 2026. 40 pages.
Francisco R. Trejo-Macotela. © 2026. 46 pages.
Mario Oscar Ordaz Oliver, Evelin Gutiérrez, Jesús Patricio Ordaz, Javier Hernández Pérez, Amadeo Manuel Hernández Hernández, Justo Fabián Montiel Hernández. © 2026. 24 pages.
Body Bottom