Relatively Democratic: How Perceived Internet Interference Shapes Attitudes about Democracy

Stoycheff, Elizabeth

doi:10.1177/1940161220909741

Cited by 9 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 54 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We know much less about digital media use in non‐democracies. In authoritarian countries with digital repressions, government information censorship, and surveillance, the Internet may not be an effective tool for closing the information gap or providing equal access to information (Morozov 2011; Stoycheff 2020). Authoritarian governments often use digital information tools for economic development, dissemination of propaganda, disinformation, or entertainment to distract the public attention away from politics (King, Pan and Roberts 2013; Morozov 2011; Tufekci 2017) or to reduce censorship awareness and demand for uncensored information (Roberts 2020).…”

Section: Social Media Use and Political Regime Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Globalizing information networks, social media, and participation

Kuznetsova

Tolbert

2023

Social Science Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives This study is one of the first to systematically evaluate the relationship between the Internet and social media use and participation in politics cross‐nationally, in democracies and non‐democracies. Most existing research on this topic analyzes one country or region. We contend that access to globalizing information networks—which exist within digital media space and where discussions of political norms and values are frequent—promotes higher rates of political participation. Methods Using multivariate analysis and individual‐level data from the seventh wave of the World Values Survey with representative samples from 45 countries, we employ jackknifed samples to investigate the association between self‐reported frequent Internet and social media use, our proxy for the exposure to globalizing information networks, and political participation. Results Results show that more frequent social media use is associated with higher political participation, all else equal. This relationship is significant in democracies and non‐democracies, suggesting that information networks increase political participation even in countries with Internet shutdowns, censorship, and limited rights and freedoms. Conclusions Despite censorship, propaganda, and misinformation, the Internet and social media may help foster political participation across international borders.

show abstract

Section: Social Media Use and Political Regime Typesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Globalizing information networks, social media, and participation

Kuznetsova

Tolbert

2023

Social Science Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Yet the cultural and economic diversity of the various national contexts complicates how these abstract principles are perceived. On the one hand, scholars have argued that it is possible to design multi-level models that demonstrate the complex relationship between the level of democratisation, internet use and internet penetration (Nisbet et al, 2012) although there may be discrepancies between perceived and actual levels of internet freedom (Stoycheff, 2020). On the other hand, opinion research involving internet users (Internet Society, 2012;Pew Research Center, 2014) suggests that demand for internet freedom is itself a function of internet use and digital literacy.…”

Section: Section 3 a Brief History Of Defining Internet Freedommentioning

confidence: 99%

The politics of internet freedom rankings

Lokot¹,

Wijermars²

2023

Internet Policy Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

International rankings play an active role in defining the issue they claim to capture and giving the issue salience by presenting it as a matter of global concern. As internet access expanded globally, the past two decades have seen a rapid proliferation of indexes measuring and comparing the state of internet freedom around the globe. This article examines the politics of these rankings, e.g. Freedom House's Freedom on the Net, that have become powerful "global pattern-setters" for how internet freedom is understood and are used as tools of political or diplomatic influence. We adopt a relational approach to explain how and why such a complex landscape of internet freedom rankings has emerged and identify how the ranking organisations' varying approaches to capturing internet freedom have played a role in defining and legitimating it as an issue of importance. Since both the uses of the internet and discussions about defining what freedom means in relation to it have developed so rapidly, we argue that the complexity of internet freedom poses unique challenges and has required ranking organisations to continually respond to these developments, negotiating their authority in relation to other actors in their field.

show abstract

“…Mass electorates are increasingly concerned with the spread of misinformation and disinformation (as documented in this special issue by Koc-Michalska et al 2020), to the point that many doubt whether news can be trusted, question whether truth can be discerned in public debate, or withdraw from the news altogether to stay out of trouble (Vaccari and Chadwick 2020). This may have detrimental effects on satisfaction for democracy and belief in the legitimacy of this complex project (as highlighted in this special issue by Stoycheff 2020). And today, as the world reels amid a global pandemic, the value of quality information has taken on new salience and the vulnerability of some sectors of our media ecosystems and of our societies have been exposed in unprecedented ways.…”

Section: Caught Off Guardmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Russia and the United States are also the focus of Stoycheff’s (2020) contribution, which addresses another potential source of democratic threats—the state itself, insofar as it engages in online mass surveillance and restricts the free flow of information on the Internet. Stoycheff investigates how citizens’ perceptions of state interference with Internet freedom predict the extent to which, and the democratic implications of, citizens’ engagement in what she terms “deliberative internet use,” defined following Bailard (2014) as the combination of “mirror holding” (seeking critical information on government) and “window opening” (consulting global metrics to assess government’s performance).…”

Section: Clarifying Challenges Assessing Solutions: This Special Issuementioning

confidence: 99%

Digital Threats to Democracy: Comparative Lessons and Possible Remedies

Miller

Vaccari

2020

The International Journal of Press/Politics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We introduce a special issue that collects eight articles, comprising research from twenty-three countries and four continents on the sources, impact on citizens, and possible remedies to various digital threats to democracy, ranging from disinformation to hate speech to state interference with online freedoms. We set these contributions against the backdrop of a profound change in how scholars think about the implications of digital media for democracy. From the utopianism that prevailed from the 1990s until the early 2010s, the post-2016 reckoning has led to a change in the kinds of questions scholars ask, with the focus gradually shifting to investigations of the threats, rather than the benefits, of the Internet. The eight contributions presented in this special issue employ a variety of disciplinary approaches and methods, often comparing different countries, to address some of the most pressing questions on how the Internet can hinder the feasibility and well-functioning of democracy around the world. We conclude by setting out three challenges for future research on digital media and politics: a growing but still partial understanding of the extent and impact of the main digital threats to democracy; the risk that the dominant approaches become overly pessimistic, or founded on weak normative grounds; and the risk that research overemphasizes direct and short-term implications of digital threats on individuals and specific groups at the expense of indirect and medium-term effects on collective norms and expectations of behavior.

show abstract

Relatively Democratic: How Perceived Internet Interference Shapes Attitudes about Democracy

Cited by 9 publications

References 54 publications

Globalizing information networks, social media, and participation

Globalizing information networks, social media, and participation

The politics of internet freedom rankings

Digital Threats to Democracy: Comparative Lessons and Possible Remedies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About