In reflection of this module’s reading and video content, I
found an overall theme emerging of the perceived effect of technology on the
democratic process and what citizenship is in our society today. As described
by Saskia Sassen in the video Networks,
Power, and Democracy openness and accessibility of a technology does not
mean equality or as she states “Democracy” for everyone using the technology.
She did a comparison between the financial and electronic activists with
regards to the balance or democracy distribution of power throughout the
networks (Social Media and other technologies). She found that the same dynamic
exists between the entities that have control and the rest of the population.
She discussed that 20% holds most of the power. This was very interesting to me
as I listened to the rest of this talk. I started to think about what she was
calling the social logic of this situation and started to consider that even
though the technology is designed to allow access for everyone; does new
literacy come into play? In other words, is there an imbalance to the democracy
due to the lack of literacy? I also began to think about what I read from Changing Citizenship in the Digital Age.
In Changing
Citizenship in the Digital Age by W. Lance Bennet it was discussed how the
idea of being a citizen is changing. It was stated in the opening sentence, “Democracy
is not a sure thing” along the same lines a s discussed by Sassen. While
reading this document I kept thinking about the movie Starship Troopers (One of my favorites) in that to be a citizen you
had to become a Trooper. The comparison came to me because it brought out that
to be a citizen you must participate in some way to contribute to the
advancement of society. Bennet has brought to light that the political concerns
of modern youth (aged 18 -25) seem to have shifted to focus on “lifestyle
concerns that seem outside the realm of government”. (PG 2) Bennet went on to
discuss “Two Paradigms of Youth Engagement, one of disengaged and one of
engaged.
The key issues that I am taking away from the readings and
video are that there is a great discussion as to the role that technologies are
playing in the idea of democracy or that we are all equal and able to
contribute the same. As a second issue we need to question, “Does contributing
mean participating as a citizen?”
You mentioned Bennet discussed the 2 paradigms of engagement. In order for the average youth to be engaged there has to be a sense ownership. Thinking about my own children (as young as they are), I see them engaged if they have a direct sense of ownership. If there is no sense of ownership then there is immediate disengagement. It may be the burden of society, parent, and/or educators to instill a sense of ownership to encourage political engagement.
ReplyDeleteMichele and Dale,
ReplyDeleteI think the sense of ownership plays a tremendous role in the situation. In McGonigal's book (2011) 'Reality is Broken' she shares an example of crowdsourcing used in Britain pertaining to a scandal where parliament members were filing illegal expense claims. The newspapers had reported the problem and of course the public demanded a full review. In response to this the government released complete records of four year's worth of expense reports, but the data was presented in the most unorganized manner possible. It therefore, made it very difficult to sift through the information. The Guardian realized the scope of the task and recruited a game designer to create a game whereby the general public would be excited to investigate the data. The result was tremendous; however, only because of a sense of ownership and a clear level of motivation drove individuals to participate. Therefore, I feel that to create engagement there has to be desire and a true sense of the ability to accomplish something.
Lydia