Last time social media was regarded as a tool of anti-corruption, but it was never and will never be only an anti-corruption tool. In politics, it can be used in many aspects, for a typical example, if a candidate of any elections is going to reinforce its influence, the candidate and its team will undoubtedly seek for help to social media which is greatly influential to the public and powerful in disseminating information like idea and policy of the candidate. (Henry J. and David T., 2003)
Ever since the birth of the first language, there came the original social media. And now, it is not only referring to the traditional ones like TV programs, radio programs or newspaper, but also integrated with new technological online social-contact platforms like Facebook, Twitter, My Space or YouTube.( Winograd, M. and Hais, M. D. 2008) What’s more, any kind of information dissemination towards the public can be called a social media. So even a sales promotion, which informs the public of the prices of goods, could be counted. Social media covers almost every human being in every corner of the world unless where there is not a “society” at all. (Johnson, Dennis W., 2009) And actually, it, to some extent, is equipped with a special leadership towards the idea of the public. Steve Forbes became the first individual to announce his presidential candidacy on the Web. What’s more, Arizona became the first state to allow online voting in its presidential primary. Furthermore, President Obama has his own website to publish his ideas and policy, meanwhile, listen to what people suggest and complain about. Basically, the transmission of information is largely conducted by characters, voice and image. Meanwhile, the online social-contact platforms were originally set up for entertainment. So on the internet, there could be some difference in those political campaigns. Under the intense scrutiny of these new platforms, candidates are exposed to a more open environment. (Young, S. 2010) They have to be excellent in relevant aspects to prove their ability of performing those important duties. Just like the way pop stars do, a candidate who looks more honest or sounds more reliable, will possibly gain more votes when the election is at a tie, because the impression is better. It is kind of like perfectism that people believe every advantage on the candidate contributes to a better country if one day the candidate were elected to be the president under the trust of the voters. There are two terms in Mr. Rheingold’s view of virtual communities: social aggregation and personal relationships. (Rheingold, 2013) In term of virtual community, political parties are aggregations of people, and there are different relationships between those party members. (Jericho, G. 2012) Meanwhile, in term of participatory culture from Mr. Jenkins, there is no limitation of participation towards the discussion. Political parties disseminate their ideas onto the online forums joining online discussions and let others interact with them. Finally, as more information can contribute to better understanding of a candidate or a party, the future political election will be more dependent on new and powerful social media.
Reference
Henry J. and David T., 2003, ‘The Digital Revolution, the Informed Citizen, and the Culture of Democracy’, Introduction to Democracy and New Media, viewed April 30, 2013 <http://web.mit.edu/transition/subs/demointro.html>
Jericho, G. 2012, 'How many votes are there on Twitter?', The rise of the Fifth Estate: social media and blogging in Australian politics, Scribe Publications Pty Ltd, Australia, EBL eBook Library, pp 254 – 278, viewed 20 January 2013.
Winograd, M. and Hais, M. D. 2008,Millenial makeover: MySpace, YouTube and the future of American politics, Rutgers University Press, Piscataway, pp 156-173
Young, S. 2010, 'New, political reporting and the internet', How Australia decides: election reporting and the media, Cambridge University Press, Australia, EBL eBook Library, pp 203-228, viewed April 30, 2013.
没有评论:
发表评论