In chapter six, Jenkins discusses the role of popular culture in emerging political communities. Jenkins (as is the case throughout Convergence Culture) is focused on how old and new media interact and the dynamics of collaboration and participation. While Jenkins recognizes the scoff-factor when implying the concept of “photoshop for democracy” (user-generated images that often map themes from popular culture onto the political campaign) is any sort of substitute for real political activism, he insists that this kind of user-generated content and mass dispersion is a serious act of citizenry. In fact, using popular culture as a means of engaging voters might just be the most effective way of re-establishing interest in politics as a part of our everyday lives. Jenkins focuses on the 2004 election and recognizes that the next step is to think of “democratic citizenship as a lifestyle.” Furthermore, online political communities seem to be segregating voters, as opposed to encouraging dialogue across ideologies. Although he seems to offer popular culture as a kind of national balm for the ailments of political fragmentation, Jenkins recognizes the inherent limits of its role in (or applicability as a model for) contemporary political communities.

For me, the most useful parts of this argument is the attention he pays to the increasing participation of average Americans (now as monitorial citizens as opposed to informed citizens) in the media landscape and the possibilities for the integration of politics and popular culture. However, he doesn’t seem to offer any real solution for the acutely polarized political landscape.

Ch. 1: “Electronic Political Discussion”

This chapter offers an overview of various online communications, including electronic email lists, Usenet and blogs. Davis addresses the question of whether or not online discussions make any difference in political processes, institutions or societal behavior and ultimately decides that the prophesized utopia of direct democracy has not yet been achieved. The obstacles facing such restructuring include: inequality in the levels of accessibility and the fragmented nature of electronic political discussion. Even the more tempered notion of deliberative democracy faces hurdles - most notably human reliance on technological solutions.

This chapter is a helpful summary of current online discussion forums and briefly pulls apart the kind of Trippi-esque claims of revolution. I'm going to utilize the rest of this book in order to examine the broad claims of internet revolution which, in the case of much writing about the internet, seem devoid of factors like accessibility.

Abstract from First Monday:

In groups people can accomplish what they cannot do alone. Now new visual and social technologies are making it possible for people to make decisions and solve complex problems collectively. These technologies are enabling groups not only to create community but also to wield power and create rules to govern their own affairs. Electronic democracy theorists have either focused on the individual and the state, disregarding the collaborative nature of public life, or they remain wedded to outdated and unrealistic conceptions of deliberation. This article makes two central claims. First, technology will enable more effective forms of collective action. This is particularly so of the emerging tools for "collective visualization" which will profoundly reshape the ability of people to make decisions, own and dispose of assets, organize, protest, deliberate, dissent and resolve disputes together.

In his article “Atomic Energy and the Democratic Process” Robert Dahl examines the way in which democracy governs atomic production. Dahl notes that in a democracy really only a portion of the public actually participates in an issue, though any individual can be mobilized into the active group if compelled by an issue. The author notes that when addressing atomic energy the group allowed to participate is constricted by the requirement of secrecy (regarding details of weapon production and emergency plans). Dahl points out that citizens “in the absence of secrecy, perhaps could and would be activated as attentive citizens” (p. 2). The author then steps further to indicate that to maintain this secrecy only a handful of “elites” are allowed to rule. The fact such important decisions lie in the hands of a few is alarming. Secrecy contradicts the idea of democracy in itself. Considering the actions of leaders in the Cold War and the sentiments of the public, one must question whether nuclear proliferation by both the US and the USSR were moves that benefited public interest or a handful of individuals acting on their own behalf.

The idea of elitist control permeates Dr. Strangelove's message. In the film a deranged general sends US planes towards Russia to be intercepted, essentially precipitating WWIII. The general’s relatively unchecked control signifies the power leaders commanded and could manipulate regardless of public interest. One must question whether given the concerns of nuclear accumulation society as a whole would have pursued the path of nuclear development. Considering the apocalyptic ending of Dr. Strangelove it would seem Kubrick thinks not.

This NY times article focuses on the ethics behind blogging.  It examines the if there should be a code for bloggers and if they should be held up to the same standard as other print medias.  Since bloggers are considered amatuers by nature, they fall under the radar.  Shear attempts to consider whether bloggers should be held accountable for their actions because of the surge in the number of bloggers over the past couple of years.

This is the best resource I have found in the library concerning teh use of blogs in American democracy. It is a short read coming in at about 150 pages and gives tons of information about bloggers and their actual participation in politics. Like most political books about stratifying an electorate, it has tons of data. Great resource.

This recent essay on the importance of blogs in politics is a very informative and compelling work. Denzer's essay has a deep focus upon the origins and the effects of blogs upon the American political structure. It also has a tremendous amount of links that lead to great resources for anyone interested in the internet and American politics. An excellent resource.

This article is less than a year old and does not have to deal with American politics. However, it is a well written critique and analysis of the influences of political blogs upon a democracy. It gives an international take upon the importance of blogs upon a democratic populace.

This website has tons of links to great resources. Both profit and non-profit websites with political blogs are readily available. The information on the website allows for a good starting place to look into the relationship between blogs and politics in American. By seperating the different types of blogs out there, it makes it much easier to scoure the internet for information about blogs and politics.

This book is an older version of Davis' later Politics Online. Unlike his later endeavor, Web is a theory based book. It feels as if this book gives Davis' theory for how the internet should work with politics and Politics Online is his research into trying to prove his hypotheses. Still a good earlier work about the potential power of the internet in teh electoral process and delibrative democracy.

In this class textbook, Sunstein reveals her fears about the "Daily Me", the process by which individuals today can filter ever more increasing amounts of electronic information to fit a highly personal profile, such that they can see only that information they wish to see in the world.  In addition, she speaks about the convergence and polarization of ideas and the groups which espouse them, on the internet to the extent that she uses the term "balkanization" for some online communities such as race hate groups or political sites.  When people of a like mind do get together on a newsgroup, bulletin board, website, or chat room, it is found that members tend to further gravitate to those who have strong, defined opinions on topics of interest and concern for those individuals.  If that is the case, if one believes that women's speech is quantitatively different from men's speech and that women may find more community by remaining in the online company of women, then it may be the case that women and men may divide their online participation among more gendered lines.  Also, the way that strong opinions, criticism, and conflict are handled online may have a direct relationship to whether or not women will espouse new ideas or new online venues outside of their known social spheres.