Developing Technologies of Humility

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Framing
Vulnerability
Distribution
Learning
Conclusion
References

Introduction

In a modern world, despite the opportunities presented by numerous technological advances, they are frequently not utilized to their full extent. In particular, various social media platforms provide unprecedented possibilities for expressing opinions on social and political affairs. However, governments express significant techno-pessimism – in this case, overemphasizing risks (Edelbach & Winston, 2013) – toward committing to the online participation establishment. The resulting communication, albeit present, remains limited and is not able to make any significant contribution to the participation issue.

Framing

The invention of social media, such as Facebook and Twitter, is meant to simplify communication between people. According to Haro-de-Rosario et al. (2018), they can be defined as “a set of online tools designed to enable and promote social interactions” (p. 30). In terms of convenience, online social platforms have quickly overtaken phone communication due to various factors, including the freedom of choice of whether, when, and how to interact. Additionally, they provided the users with the ability to participate in actions and events without the need to be physically present. In this context, governments across the globe have already made some attempts to broaden the participation scope toward various social and political issues. However, their effort lacked several essential elements in order to prove genuinely successful.

The main concern in this regard refers to the interactivity of the information supplied by governmental sources to social media channels. In order to achieve high levels of user engagement, there should be established two-way communication between the government and its citizens. However, in its current state, despite high levels of governmental activity on social platforms, the overall engagement level tends to be relatively low (Haro-de-Rosario et al., 2018). It indicates that the activity is primarily informative and one-sided.

Vulnerability

The population group that is the most vulnerable due to the current state is people genuinely interested in participation. It is mainly due to the fact that, despite having the incredibly convenient option of sharing ideas and voting on specific issues, they are denied online dialogue and have to find another way of participating. While it is understandable why some major issues, such as governmental elections, cannot be framed online yet because of user identity issues (Rustad, 2015), the decisions regarding some local problems perfectly fit the online framework. For instance, not being able to physically attend the voting for local landscape changes robs people of the chance to protect the environment.

Distribution

Among the reasons why the current online citizen-government communication remains one-sided lies in the insufficient resource commitment on the latter side. In this regard, it would prove greatly beneficial to establish institutions or agencies that would focus specifically on encouraging and sustaining the social media dialogue. This way, social media users would not only be able to receive information but also communicate with the official representatives on a regular basis (Haro-de-Rosario et al., 2018). Such practices would increase the transparency of governmental actions and enhance interactivity.

Learning

The main lesson that can be learned from the current use of social media in promoting public participation is that a sole governmental presence is not enough. Despite the fact that government agencies do provide tools for online participation, the overall engagement level is still limited since social media accounts by themselves do not automatically overcome the population’s passivity. In this regard, the government has to take responsibility for the constant encouragement of interaction. However, the absence of specific norms and regulations covering this issue showcases that online participation is not considered a priority, which might be the main barrier between the population and decision-makers.

Conclusion

In its current state, social media communication between citizens and their government is not effective in increasing the participation level. In the majority of the cases, it remains strictly informative and provides few interaction opportunities. The introduction of institutions specifically devoted to online communication could have provided a solution. Unfortunately, the absence of any policies and efforts concerning the subject showcases that the attention of decision-makers is focused on other matters.

References

Edelbach, R. & Winston, M. (2013). Society, ethics, & technology (5th ed.). Cengage.

Haro-de-Rosario, A., Sáez-Martín, A., & del Carmen Caba-Pérez, M. (2018). Using social media to enhance citizen engagement with local government: Twitter or Facebook?. New Media & Society, 20(1), 29-49. Web.

Rustad, M. L. (2015). Global internet law in a nutshell (3rd ed.). West Academic Publishing.

Click Here To Order Now!