The decision of the Supreme Court on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission shows that the First Amendment to the Constitution can give rise to various interpretations and legal debates. Moreover, this case can have profound implications for political campaign in the country. This paper is aimed at analyzing the reasons behind this ruling of the court. Moreover, it is necessary to examine both concurring and dissenting opinions in order to determine the extent to which this verdict can be justified.
Main Body
First, according to the majority opinion, corporations, unions, or non-profit from organizations should be allowed to broadcast electioneering communications even before general or primary elections (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 2010, unpaged). Moreover, this decision of the Supreme Court overruled some provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA). This legislative act set limits on the corporate spending on political campaigning.
This provision of the BCRA was declared to be unconstitutional because it violated people’s right to free speech and expression (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 2010, unpaged). The decision is premised on the idea that the Constitution and especially the First Amendment give equal protection to individual citizens and to groups of citizens who can form unions, lobbies, or corporations. This argument was supported by Justices Kennedy, Scalia, Robert, and Thomas.
In turn, according to the dissenting opinion, this ruling can give corporations too much political power, and create loopholes for corruption of political leaders. The thing is that corporate entities have more opportunities to collect larger sums of money. Therefore, they can outspend many of their political opponents. Those judges, who dissented, for example, Stevens, Breyer, or Ginsburg, argued that unlimited corporate participation in political campaign can eventually stifle the voices of other people.
There are various approaches that can be used to analyze this case. In particular, one can focus on the approach taken by Justice Antonin Scalia. His views are premised on the idea that the First Amendment emphasizes the protection of free speech, but it does not distinguish between types of speakers (Scalia, unpaged).
In other words, this legal document does not tell that corporations should not be granted the right to free speech. There is no specification or a footnote mentioning that any associations of people should be denied the right to free speech.
In part, his interpretation of the First Amendment can be called a black-letter approach. This means that a legislator should focus on the text of a legal document, rather than its supposed or alleged meanings. Provided that there is no explicit prohibition on corporate political activism, there is no reason to limit their expenditures on political campaigns.
This argument can be accepted, however, one should take into account that laws are constantly elaborated, specified, or even abolished. Therefore, a black-letter approach can actually disregard the spirit of the law.
Secondly, the concurring opinion of Justice Scalia relies on the idea that corporations represent people’s interests, and goals. They are not some separate entities that are created ex nihilo.
They are formed by individual people, and they are run by people. More importantly, they represent the interests of shareholders and employees. Hence, such associations of people have the same right to free speech. Moreover, according to Justice Scalia, the prohibition of corporate political speech can “muzzle the principal agents of the modern free economy” (Scalia, unpaged).
In other words, these organizations act as the main drivers of modern economy, and they should have a right to express their agreement or disagreement with the policies of the state; otherwise they are not likely to succeed. Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that in many cases, corporate executives failed to meet their commitments to stakeholders. In fact, many corporate scandals indicate that very often, stakeholders cannot influence the decisions of corporate leaders. This is the main limitation of Scalia’s interpretation.
In part, this line of reasoning has been challenged has been Joel Seligman. In this opinion of this legal professional, it might be very dangerous to equate the rights of individual citizens with the rights of corporations.
In Seligman’s view, this decision can create the basis for further political liberation of corporations; in particular, one can speak about their ability to make “direct corporate contributions to candidates” (Seligman, unpaged). Currently, they are prohibited from doing it, if this prohibition is lifted, the political power of corporations can become virtually unchallenged, especially given their financial power.
Conclusion
Overall, the decision of the Supreme Court can be supported because corporations have to comply with a variety of laws and regulations, but at the same time they must be allowed to express their political opinion. These associations of people can be criticized for a variety of reasons, but they will continue to remain the main drivers of the U.S. economy.
Therefore, they should have a right to political speech. Nevertheless, it is worth remembering that there are cases when corporations failed to act in the best interest of their stakeholders. Moreover, in many cases, corporate executives acted against these interests. This is the risk that legislators should not overlook.
Works Cited
Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. No. 08-205. Supreme Court of the U.S., 21 Jan, 2010. Web.
Scalia, Antonin. “Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission”. Supreme Court of the U.S. 2010. Web.
Seligman, Joel. “Is The Corporation The Person? Reflections on Citizens United v.
Federal Election Commission.”. New York: The University of Rochester, 2010. Web.
The role that ethnicity plays in American residents’ voting activities continues to defy political scientists’ expectations. Dahl theorized that as immigrants were becoming more integrated into society, they would shy away from ethnically motivated political choices. However, real-life evidence countered that point: for instance, once the New Haven Italian community improved its social-economic status, it started to put even more importance on ethical voting. Wolfinger criticized the “melting pot” concept and opined that ethnic identification does not disappear all that easily: it might as well accompany a person with an immigrant background throughout their life.
Florida’s 18th Congressional District elections demonstrated that ethnic consciousness was very much alive among immigrant communities. Firstly, it is worth mentioning that the district spanning Miami and Miami Beach is multinational. Moreno and Rae report that in the 1980s, more than half of its residents were Hispanic, 13% Black, and 1% Asian. The second factor that explains ethical voting is the high concentration of people of the same background in specific settlements. For instance, Little Havana and Hileah were dominated by Latinos while Overtown and Liberty City were mostly inhabited by Black communities. Living in ethnic clusters might have driven those communities to conserve and sustain the sense of ethnic identity that was translated into their political activities.
Probably, the most interesting manifestation of ethnic voting in the 1980s was the Cuban community’s overwhelming support for the Republican party. Originally, Cubans were satisfied with the democrat Congressman Pepper representing the district. Pepper was cautious in his politics and sought to meet the diverse needs of the many ethnic communities residing in the area. However, by the time of the next elections, Democrats had made a few grave mistakes that cost them Cubans’ positive attitude.
Firstly, the overarching sentiment among democrats was in favor of maintaining good relations with Fidel Castro whom many Cuban-Americans despised. The Republican party, on the other hand, was strongly anti-communist and castigated Castro. Secondly, the Democratic party’s Richman countered the Republican Atwater’s statement that the seat of the 18th district belonged to a Cuban. Richman said that it was an American seat: a remark that could have otherwise been pretty innocuous but not in that political climate.
Overall, Florida’s 18th Congressional District elections proved to be extremely ethnically driven. The first factor is candidates’ attempts to appeal to certain ethnic groups instead of proposing policies that would apply to all residents. For instance, the Cuban-American Republican candidate Ros-Lehtinen learned that trying to attract voters from various backgrounds would be a waste of energy. She was strongly promoted as the first Cuban-American to be elected to Congress, which was something that the Cuban community could get behind.
Drawing on this point, the very accentuation of candidates’ ethnicity showed that ethnic voting was a lived reality for Florida. Cubans were not the only community that supported politicians with similar backgrounds. According to Moreno and Rae, the Jewish Democratic vote was largely motivated by the fact that the candidate was a Jew himself. Thirdly, at some point, contenders abandoned any endeavors to discuss actual social and economic issues and made it a point to criticize and attack each other. Ros-Lehtinen galvanized the situation by calling Richman a bigot and using his “bigotry” as an excuse to avoid debates with him. In summation, the aforementioned factors fit Wolfinger’s model of ethnic voting and prove that the phenomenon was still persistent in the 1980s.
Bibliography
Moreno, Dario, and Nicol Rae.”Ethnicity and Partnership: The Eighteenth Congressional District of Miami.” In Miami Now: Immigration, Ethnicity, and Social Change, edited by Guillermo Grenier and Alex Stepick, 187-204. Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1992.
Globalization has brought about dramatic increase in the speed of major economic, technological, and social shifts around the world. The interconnectedness of societies around the world has important consequences, especially for the speed with which change takes place in economic and cultural spheres.
The globalization of trade and modern communications systems means that, for instance, youth clothing fashions, movies, and music move around the world at tremendous speed. The political leadership of countries such as Asia, Iran, Egypt, and other dictatorships has been able to prevent the speed of open political systems. Each of these dictatorships has resisted the pull of openness, under the guise of protecting the people from capitalism, or protecting nationalism.
However, they have not succeeded in cutting off their countries from being connected to the global economy. The rapid spread of youth culture has been even more difficult to prevent, even in Islamic dictatorships that have both political and religious organizations at their disposal to try to control the culture changes; since young people are relatively more in tune with new electronic communication systems such as email, Twitter and Facebook, and for the reason that they are generally open to new things.
This paper looks at how the internet (especially social network Facebook and Twitter) affects politics and elections. It puts more emphasis on Twitter by highlighting some of the impacts it has had on politics. It also looks at how the government can control the social networks and concludes by giving the reasons that forced the government of Egypt to ban the use of Twitter.
Twitter
Twitter is a free social media service that allows anyone to say almost anything to anybody in 140 characters or less. Over the past few months, Twitter has experienced an explosive growth which has a roused the interest of many developers. In consequence, there have appeared many analytic tools which, besides other characteristics, calculate how influential a user is. In just four years, twitter has become one of the most popular social-media networking tools.
Its more than 145 million users have made it a public platform for the discussion and dissemination of news related to business, politics, education and gossip. In Twitter, the users are characterized by a basic profile that includes personal or corporate information and details about their contact network. Twitter users are not only people, but also organizations and companies that use Twitter as a broadcast medium. They are interested in extending their influence to reach a bigger audience and influencers to work with them.
In Twitter, Hashtags are used to bring together explicit tweets about fussy topics or to a certain extent, it organizes tweets together and they help in finding exact topics or procedures. Today, twitter has become an important news and political vehicle. Often, breaking news stories are first reported on Twitter and then picked up by major media sources.
More to that, several media outlets use Twitter to determine public response on various issues. A graduate journalism student by the name James Buck was arrested in Egypt for photographing an antigovernment protest; he used Twitter to get out the message. He was in a position to transmit updates concerning his conditions while being incarcerated.
He was released the next day. During the 2008 terrorist attacks in Mumbai, India, eyewitnesses twittered every five seconds, letting the rest of the world know what was happening (Medaglia 266). After the presidential elections in Iran were deemed fraudulent by many citizens, the Iranian government shut off most internet outlets. But it wasn’t able to shut off Twitter. Indeed, twitter was almost the only communication medium for protesters in Iran. Much of what the rest of the world saw came through Twitpics
Egypt and ICT
In recent years Egypt has become a regional leader in the information and communication technology (ICT) segment, largely due to the government’s focus on expanding access to computers and the internet. With an internet penetration rate of 15.9% as of mid-2009, the country is ahead of most of its neighbours in Africa and the Middle East.
Telecom Egypt, the state-owned telecoms provider, saw an 83% jump in DSl subscriptions in 2008 alone. At least among broadband subscribers the internet has become a major competitor with TV (Margolis and Resnick 52).
Importantly, Egypt boasts of a growing upper and upper-middle class, which is young, educated and well travelled. This is an ideal market for web-based enterprises, which have yet to make a substantial dent in the overall media landscape. Unlike a number of Egypt’s neighbours, the government does not censor the internet.
That said, the state does not keep tabs on sites that are critical of national leaders or Islam, and over the past few years a number of bloggers have been fined, jailed, or deported for what they have published on personal websites. In early April 2008, for instance, Esra Abdel Fattah, an Egyptian blogger, sought to organize a protest over rising food prices via a group on the popular social networking site Facebook. Fattah was arrested on April 5, the night before the scheduled protest after her forum had attracted 72, 000 followers (Kiesow 5).
Twitter is popular in Egypt. Girls and women are excited by new technology in general and are interested in how it can be used to enhance their lives. Students write papers extolling the virtues of technology, and are eager to take classes that teach them more about technological innovations.
However, in spite of its growing popularity, it can damage a girl’s reputation and future because of misrepresentation of photographs, comments, or even friends. Even a full stop or an exclamation mark used incorrectly can give off the wrong signals (Van der Graft 134). A photo taken out of context can give off a lot of wrong signal and wrong messages. Twitter is the most powerful tool to facilitate and use as a weapon to arm gossip.
Use of Online Media in Election crusades
The use of online media in election campaigns is leading to suppositions concerning the revolution of politics and cyber-democracy. Politicians vying for seats in parliament are more and more using online media (especially Twitter) to publicize information to possible voters and building vibrant, online communities.
Depicting from an online investigation of the Twitter networks of two politicians vying for seats in the house voting in Egypt, it is apparent that the online field is principally inhabited by users who already know the candidates via the conventional channels of party unions, and that they do not anticipate to manipulate the strategy of their candidates. As an alternative, users view Twitter largely as an information outlet and a means to achieve social reputation (Bimber 140).
The use of digital media in political campaigns in conjunction with the national elections has rapidly been growing worldwide. National elections in Egypt together with developed countries such as the US and the UK exemplify this well. In other countries with the highest penetration of Information and Communications Technologies (ICTs) among citizens, ICT is being applied in national political campaigning.
The use of ICT for participatory purposes in general is seen to be more likely to occur in contexts that are less affected by the issues of digital divide. Studies on the digital divide highlight the fact that social groups with a lack of financial resources are less likely to have access to, and to use ICT, particularly internet-enables features. Such a constraint on the demand of ICT-enables forms of interaction affects the diffusion of the use and adoption of ICT for participatory purposes (Andersen, Henriksen, Medaglia and Secher 29).
However, research on the use of ICT in political campaigning has only just begun to investigate the impact on citizen participation in political campaigns that the most recent Web tools such as forums, wiki applications, and social networking services, would have.
The speedy expansion of the internet has stimulated claims that huge revolutions in the formation of political power in Egypt and other countries in the Middle east are in the process: the populist assert that the internet will grind down the control of prearranged groups and political leaders, and the community-building assert that the internet will result in the reformation of the nature of society and the basics of social order.
These assertions are important because they deal not only with the presently trendy subject of the internet but also primary questions concerning the fundamental role of communication in community life (Dahal 47).
Today’s political parties and candidates realize the benefits of using the internet to conduct online campaigns and raise funds. Voters also are increasingly using the web to access information about parties and candidates, promote political goals, and obtain political news.
Generally, the use of the internet is an expensive way for candidates to contact, recruit, and mobilize supporters, as well as disseminate information about their positions on issues (Manuel, 264). However, it is now a viable medium for communication political information and interacting with voters was made clear in the campaigns preceding the 2004, 2006, and 2008 elections.
According to a Pew Research Centre survey following the 2004 presidential elections, 29% of Americans said that they went online for election news, up from 4% who did so in the 1999 campaign (Lusoli Ward and Gibson 24). Nearly seven in ten of this group went online to seek information on the candidates’ positions. Moreover, 43% of this group claimed that the information they found online affected their voting decisions.
A similar analysis in Egypt has forced the government to block the use of Twitter completely. It was found out that, twitter was being used by political candidates to mobilize citizens in protesting against the 30 years rule by Mubarak. According to many people, the president has ruled for a very long period of time and they perceived that it is time for the president to leave the office. However, their plea was not received warmly by the government and they had to use social networking site, Twitter to protest against this ruling.
They were not successful as this led to the banning of Twitter in Egypt and no one can access it now. Nevertheless, other social networking sites such as Facebook (which is as widely used as Twitter) remains active. This means that, politicians are still conducting protests but they are now cautious less the government bans Facebook as well (Horn 3).
The Influence of Social Networks On Elections
Following the June 2009 Iranian elections, authorities slowed connections to the internet, blocked social networking platforms such as twitter and Facebook, and tampered with SMS services. In a number of countries, particularly Egypt, a combination of supervision and careful trial efficiently restricts bloggers and particular minority groups. The message being sent by the state is that you cannot hide in cyberspace.
It is a lucid caution to any person in search of the secrecy of cyberspace to voice political censure or articulate alternative lifestyles. While national governments are the primary drivers of filtering practices, corporate actors are becoming the main implementers of filtering and packet shaping practices, either as a consequence of the legal requirements of the states in which they are based or of their own accord and reflecting monetary or proprietary concerns (Hoff and Horrocks 67).
Twitter’s Political Influence
There seems to be no consensus about what exactly influence means in the twitter universe and there are several definitions which try to determine which aspects are relevant when estimating twitter’s influence. Nevertheless, all of them focus on explaining the impact of a user in the community.
Twitter’s influence can be defined as a measure of the communication effectiveness and capability to engage the audience (Held 20). The criteria to establish the degree of influence of the users can range from quantitative data about the number of their connections in the social network to more qualitative aspects related to the content of their tweets.
Twitter’s profound effect on society: from news coverage to politics to customer relations and the nature of celebrity, this seemingly simple service is transforming entire industries. Newspapers use Twitter as both a source of stories and a way to distribute their own headlines. Many of the top Twitter users are news agencies, and twitter members have been known to Tweet about breaking news hours before its coverage on television.
News and politics go hand in hand, and politicians are equally cognizant of Twitter’s power. US president Barrack Obama has an enormous Twitter following, and his team posts occasional updates that request feedback from the American public. Twitter makes available a correlation between celebrities and their fans that is more unswerving than ever before. Some of the world’s most recognized names are using Twitter, giving unprecedented insights into their everyday lives (Pateman 23).
EParticipation and the use of Twitter is a facet of democracy and could potentially add pluralism. Transformation of politics or the interaction between politicians and citizens would not be likely to occur. When investigating the array of digital tools that Twitter users adopt to interact with their candidates, it is clear that there is poor integration between communication occurring within the social network and other digital tools available for the citizen-politician relationship.
In other words, the average Twitter user uses only Twitter itself to interact with the candidates, without seeking any other digital means. It has to be specified, however, that this applies only to social network users who do interact somehow with the candidates that they link with. The social network platform is mainly seen as a means to obtain information that is, establishing a one-way relation in which information is retrieved from policy-makers for use by citizens (Manuel 339).
Twitter users in the Egyptian politics are arguably to be encompassed within modes of ICT-enabled democratic relations that give citizens a more passive role as the Consumer mode. In this sense, findings suggest that the citizen-politician interaction within twitter environment does not introduce significant changes in the way politics traditionally works.
Government’s Control of Social Networks
In trying to reform telecoms laws, Congress is raising hackles with its attempts to control indecency on the internet. Ironically, the indecency language in the reform bill being hashed out today wouldn’t cover some of the most obscene material on the ‘Net. The internet is hailed as thee next revolution in communications. But, like print, video, radio and every other medium. It has a dark side.
The web is as hateful, useful, powerful, vicious, and beneficial as the people who manipulate it. No law can diminish the appeal of poisoned ideas to certain minority, and it isn’t realistic to think any government can keep anyone off the ‘net for long Censorship adds a certain allure to any idea, no matter how warped, and history has shown that government control of communications has dire consequences.
Well, the internet is the ultimate market, and some of the ideas for sale stink. But that doesn’t mean governments are powerless against those who spread hate (Guthrie and Dutton 574). By publishing their messages on the Web, these groups expose their members to the public and their ideas to the cold light scrutiny. Because the web works both ways, they open their thoughts to criticism and dissection.
The government can also apply the power of the purse to discourage the internet service provider from hosting hate groups. They provide can be forced to have a conscience about incendiary messages. Another problem is prudent use policies allow activity that is costly and non-productive because Internet users must spend a certain amount of time surfing the ‘Net to familiarize themselves with the locations of various servers and to learn how to best use them.
The real paradox of internet access is that using global E-mail and perusing and downloading from many commercial, government and academic servers can improve productivity, while junk E-mail and electronic visits to digital singles bars during work hours can kill productivity.
Many companies have tried to address this issue by adopting a prudent use policy, which seems good in theory but fails miserably in practice because the policy is not strictly enforced. A prudent use policy states that if it is not acceptable to physically leave the office during business hours for a trip to the wine store or to plan for a family vacation, then it is not acceptable to do so electronically. One problem with prudent use policies is that they do not always produce the expected results.
Protest against Hosni Mubarak rule in Egypt
Hosni Mubarak has ruled in Egypt since 1981 and has stirred protests due to the way he has controlled the country and a lack of free and fair election. The organizers of this protests used twitter and other social media to organize them despite the fact that these protest are not allowed in Egypt which has been under martial law since 1961.
These organized protests brought large groups of people into the street to complain about government corruption and pro-longed ruling of Hosni Mubarak. This led to the president controlling information by banning twitter and other social media as away of controlling information on what was happening in his government (Anon 2).
The Egyptian government has blocked the Twitter as a way of preventing accidental access to child sexual abuse material on the internet and to prevent political protests. In other cases, data is being retained for law enforcement purposes or to filter traffic for copyright violations. The impact of Twitter is the recent Iran elections is a good example of ways in which enhanced technology is making it possible for citizens to voice their opinions and concerns to a global audience.
Facebook has caused a stir in the Middle East, evident by recent coverage of it being used as a platform for protest by ‘giving voices to the voiceless’. A Saudi Arabian woman was recently beaten and killed by her father after he discovered she had been conversing with a man on Twitter. While extreme, this example illustrates the tension that Twitter has created in the world and the threat to cultural norms is the likely reason for Twitter censorship by governments.
Conclusion
Globalization has brought about many challenges in the society ranging from what people wear, learn, or eat. It has also had an immense influence on culture and has led to many technological innovations. The most recent innovation, which is being adopted in almost every region, is the use of internet and computers.
This has now become a means of communication and old means such as use of post office have now been swept away. The internet has led to many transformations in societies: both positive and negative results; Children as young as ten years are using the internet and this has had a negative impact on how they dress or converse with their peers. The child girl is at very high risk of being spoilt as they are reading materials that is far beyond what they can comprehend.
The internet has also influenced politics and candidates are using it to reach their fans. the emergence of social networking sites such as Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, among others have had a great impact on politics of many nations especially the developed nations such the US and the UK and some parts of Middle East and Africa. Politicians are using the social networks particularly Facebook and Twitter to protest against the government.
A research survey indicates that more than 60% of the voters who participated during the 2008 elections in US were influenced by the information updated on Twitter. The US is not the only country that has experienced an immense impact on the use of Twitter. Other countries in the Middle East such as Asia have also suffered negatively from this social network. In Egypt, twitter was being used to protest against the ruling of Mubarak and this forced the government to ban it.
Works Cited
Andersen, Kliton; Henriksen, Hezra; Medaglia, Robert; and Secher, Carole. Costs of Eparticipation: The Management Challenges. Transforming Government: people, process & Policy 1 (1), 29-43, 2007.
Anon. “Titter Blocked in Egypt after Political Protest.” lawrencejones, 2011. Web.
Bimber, Bruce. The Internet and Political Transformation: Populism, Community, and Accelerated Pluralism. Policy 31(1), 133-160 (1998).
Dahal, Robert. Who Governs? Democracy and power in an American City. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1982.
Guthrie K. Kelvin and Dutton H. Walter. The Politics of Citizen Access Technology: The Development of Public Information Utilities in Four Cities. Policy Studies Journal 20(4), 574-597, 1992.
Held, David. Models of Democracy. Oxford: Blackwell, 1996. Print.
Hoff, Janis; Horrocks, Ian; and Tops, Peter. Democratic Governance and New Technology: Technologically Mediated Innovations in Political practice in Western Europe. London: Routledge, 2000. Print.
Lusoli, Wilson, Ward, Steven and Gibson K. Rimond. (Re) Connecting Politics? Parliament, the Public and the Internet. Parliamentary Affairs 59(1), 24-42 (2006).
Manuel, Castells. Communication Power [Electronic Resource]. New York: Oxford University Press, 2009. Print.
Margolis, Maurice and Resnick, Davis. Politics as Usual: The Cyberspace Revolution. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2000.
Medaglia, Robert. Measuring the Diffusion of Eparticipation: A Survey on Italian Local Government. Information polity: the international Journal of Government & Democracy in the Information Age 12(4), 265-280, 2007.
Pateman, Carole. Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970. Print.
Van der Graft, Peter., & Svenesson, Joseph. Explaining eDemocracy development: A quantitative empirical study. Information Polity 11(2), 123-134, 2006.