Content area
Full Text
Online networks and the political process
The internet and related technologies allow novel forms of political participation. Recent events in Iran following the alleged fraud in the presidential elections of June of 2009 have made the impact of new technologies particularly visible to the general public. Social media like Twitter or YouTube were considered instrumental in the coordination and diffusion of the activities surrounding those protests and mobilisations. Cases like this have shown that social-networking sites may allow citizens to often (not always) overcome censorship and spread information beyond authoritarian control; but the actual role that these new technologies play in strengthening civic networks and enhancing their ability to organise is still a disputed matter. This is due, in part, to the journalistic and anecdotal evidence on which the account of contentious events is usually based. In more democratic societies, however, there is growing evidence that an increasing share of the population go online to engage in the political process (Bimber, 2003; Chadwick, 2006). This trend challenges claims suggesting that civil society networks are shrinking (Paxton, 1999; Putnam, 2000; McPherson et al. , 2006). While it is obvious that internet technologies are facilitating information exchange, it is less clear how the resulting networks form and evolve, and to what extent their structural properties are responsible for a more plural flow of information.
Discussion networks play a crucial role in the democratic process because they give citizens the opportunity to engage in political talk and assess conflicting ideas (Lazarsfeld et al. , 1968; Zuckerman, 2005; Mutz, 2006). By discussing politics, people become more acquainted with their own opinions, which can result in a stronger political engagement; and they become more aware of oppositional arguments, which can lead to higher tolerance and even trust in those who hold different views. Empirical research assessing the consequences of networks for political participation is far from conclusive (Mutz, 2002; Klofstad, 2007). But there is emerging consensus that discussion networks unfold mechanisms of social influence that cannot be grasped just by focusing on isolated individuals. Differences arise when estimating the effects of such influence because the evidence suggests that it can actually work in two directions: discussion networks can amplify preferences if individuals interact with like-minded people or they can...