RC 10 - Electronic Democracy

To content | To menu | To search

18Aug 2010

Deliberating Environmental Policy Issues by Julien Talpin and Stéphanie Wojcik

19:19 - By Stephanie Wojcik - Publications

Talpin, Julien and Wojcik, Stéphanie (2010) "Deliberating Environmental Policy Issues: Comparing the Learning Potential of Online and Face-To-Face Discussions on Climate Change," Policy & Internet: Vol. 2 : Iss. 2, Article 4.
DOI: 10.2202/1944-2866.1026
http://www.psocommons.org/policyandinternet/vol2/iss2/art4

To what extent is political participation deepened and enriched by the Internet? Is the Internet more inclusive - especially towards the young - than traditional forms of participation requiring physical contact? Do people learn more by discussing on the Internet - and especially in online political forums - than by deliberating face-to-face? We aim to answer these questions by presenting the results of research based on the observation of a deliberative experience that allowed both online and face-to-face participation, namely the IDEAL-EU project, carried out by the Tuscany (Italy), Catalonia (Spain), and Poitou-Charentes (France) regions. IDEAL-EU was aimed at involving young people - between ages 14 and 30 - to discuss the issue of climate change in order to produce a report to be handed to the President of the European Parliament Commission on Climate Change. It first consisted in online discussion forums, and then in an electronic town meeting organized in the three regions' capitals in November 2008. This town meeting involved both keypad voting and face-to-face discussions in small groups.
The comparison of these two stages of the experience allows evaluation of the respective effects of online and face-to-face political discussions on young participants’ political knowledge. Using content analysis of websites, direct observation of the assembly, and interviews and questionnaires completed by both online and assembly participants, we evaluate the respective effects of these different forms of civic engagement for actors' perceived level of knowledge on climate change and on their political competence more generally.

13Aug 2010

Electronic Elections: The Perils and Promises of Digital Democracy by R. Michael Alvarez and Thad E. Hall

14:32 - By Stephanie Wojcik - Publications

Alvarez_Hall.gif Princeton University Press, February 2010, 256 p.
ISBN: 978-1-4008-3408-2
http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8641.html

Since the 2000 presidential election, the United States has been embroiled in debates about electronic voting. Critics say the new technologies invite tampering and fraud. Advocates say they enhance the accuracy of vote counts and make casting ballots easier and ultimately foster greater political participation. Electronic Elections cuts through the media spin to assess the advantages and risks associated with different ways of casting ballots and shows how e-voting can be the future of American democracy.

Elections by nature are fraught with risk. Michael Alvarez and Thad Hall fully examine the range of past methods and the new technologies that have been created to try to minimize risk and accurately reflect the will of voters. Drawing upon a wealth of new data on how different kinds of electronic voting machines have performed in recent elections nationwide, they evaluate the security issues that have been the subject of so much media attention, and examine the impacts the new computer-based solutions is having on voter participation. Alvarez and Hall explain why the benefits of e-voting can outweigh the challenges, and they argue that media coverage of the new technologies has emphasized their problems while virtually ignoring their enormous potential for empowering more citizens to vote. The authors also offer ways to improve voting technologies and to develop more effective means of implementing and evaluating these systems.

Electronic Elections makes a case for how e-voting can work in the United States, showing why making it work right is essential to the future vibrancy of the democratic process.

R. Michael Alvarez is professor of political science at the California Institute of Technology. Thad E. Hall is associate professor of political science and research fellow at the Institute of Public and International Affairs at the University of Utah. They are the authors of Point, Click, and Vote.

Table of Contents
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS vii
PREFACE ix
CHAPTER 1: What This Book Is About 1
CHAPTER 2: Paper Problems, Electronic Promises 12
CHAPTER 3: Criticisms of Electronic Voting 30
CHAPTER 4: The Frame Game 50
CHAPTER 5: One Step Forward, Two Steps Back 71
CHAPTER 6: The Performance of the Machines 100
CHAPTER 7: Public Acceptance of Electronic Voting 133
CHAPTER 8: A New Paradigm for Assessing Voting Technologies 156
CHAPTER 9: Conclusion 178
NOTES 191
BIBLIOGRAPHY 207
INDEX 217

12Aug 2010

IPSA-ECPR Joint Conference, Sao Paulo (Brazil), 16-19 February 2011

15:28 - By Administrator - Events

Deadline extended : 20 August 2010

At the next IPSA-ECPR Joint Conference, "Whatever Happened to North-South?" which will take place in Sao Paulo (Brazil) on 16-19 February 2011, two panels could be of interest for RC10 members or researchers interested in electronic democracy :

06Aug 2010

Promises and Limits of Web-deliberation by Raphaël Kies

08:18 - By Stephanie Wojcik - Publications

Palgrave Macmillan, March 2010, 200 p.
ISBN : 978-0-230-61921-0, ISBN10 : 0-230-61921-5
http://us.macmillan.com/promisesandlimitsofwebdeliberation

Does the increasing usage of online political forums lead to a more deliberative democracy ? This book answers to this question by presenting the evolution of the public spaces in a historical perspective, by defining and operationalizing the deliberative criteria of democracy, and by measuring and evaluating the impact ofvirtualization of the political debates under threes perspectives. It looks at the extent to which different categories of the population debate online, it looks at the categories of actors hosting online political forum, and it assesses the quality of the online political debates in different contexts. The final aim of this work is to provide a more balanced evaluation of the impact of virtualization of the political debates and to enrich the evolving deliberative theory with new findings.

Table of contents
Deliberative democracy : origins, meaning and major controversies * Deliberative democracy and its operationalization * Extension of the online political debates * Existing findings on deliberativeness of web-debates * Analysis of “radicali italiani” * Online campaign in Issy-les-Moulineaux

Biography of the author
Raphaël Kies is Researcher in Political Science at the University of Luxembourg. He is Co-founder of the E-democracy Center (Switzerland), he is member of the Réseau de Démocratie ELectronique (France) and of the ECPR standing group on Internet&Politics. In Luxembourg he is co-responsible for the national and European electoral studies, and for the introduction of innovative methods of political participation such as the voting advice application smartvote.lu and the European Citizens Consultation. He has published several articles and reports on e-democracy, local democracy, and deliberative democracy.

06Aug 2010

RC10 supported INMED workshop "eDemocracy and Political Communication", Dubrovnik (Croatia), 24-26 May 2010

05:50 - By Norbert Kersting


INMED Workshop, “eDemocracy and Political Communication” supported by IPSA was held in Dubrovnik, Croatia at the Inter University Center from 24 to 26 May 2010 and was organized by the Institute for New Media and eDemocracy in partnership with DEL research network.
The Workshop was part of the annual Information Technology and Journalism conference organized by the Faculty of Political Science in Zagreb and the Institute for New Media. It was supported by IPSA's Research Committee 10 on Electronic democracy.

Download : Dubrovnik_2010_Program.pdf

Download : Dubrovnik_2010_Report.pdf

Presentations available here

Program

Monday, May 24

10:00 - 10:30:
Registration
10:30 - 11:30:
Opening (Conference Goals and Themes) - Prof. dr. Nenad Prelog, InMED – Institute for New Media and E-Democracy, Croatia
11:30 - 12:15:
Classification of political communication videos on YouTube - Dr. Domagoj Bebić, InMED – Institute for New Media and E-Democracy, Croatia
16:00- 16:45:
Citizens, journalists, politicians and the Internet – Dr. Susan Salgado, Foundation to Science and Technology and New University of Lisbon, Portugal
16:45- 17:45:
Round Table

Tuesday, May 25

09:30 - 10:15:
Croatian Presidential Elections on the Internet – Ms. Maja Dodić Gruičić, Croatia
10.15 – 11.00:
The Adoption of Blogs and Blogging Practices by Political Candidates: The Case of Finland – Mr. Tom Carlson and Mr. Göran Djupsund, Abo Akademi University, Finland
11.30 – 12.15:
Online Political Citizens During Presidential Campaign for 2009 in Romania- Mr. Andra Seceleanu, "Andrei Saguna" University, Romania
16.00 – 16.45:
Local e-society in Poland – the role of e-administration and e-government in creating local network society - Mrs. Ilona Biernacka-Ligieza, University of Opole, Poland
16.45 – 17.30:
‘Baseej have guns we have brains’ The Sea of Green on Twitter – Dr. Daniele Salerno, University of Bologna, Italy
17.30 – 18.15:
Negative camapagning on the Internet in presidential elections in Croatia in 2010 (student paper) – Katarina Andrić and Maja Popović, Faculty of Political Science, Croatia

Wednesday, May 26

9:30 – 10:15:
"The Rumor Bomb" - Prof. Jayson Harsin, The American University of Paris, France
10:15 – 11:00:
Talking Politics Online: The State of Net-Based Public Sphere Research- Dr.Todd Graham, University of Groningen, The Netherlands
11:30- 12:15:
Empowerment through Technologies: “parties of power”, public protest and the internet media in Ukraine – Mr. Oleksandr Svyetlov, National Academy of Science, Ukraine
12:30 – 13:15:
Is This Goodbye to Ethics in Journalism? An Analysis of African News Coverage in the Internet Age – Mr. Bruce Mutsvairo, University of Hull, UK
13:30 – 14:15:
Closing remarks

Graham_Dubrovnik.jpg
Todd Graham's presentation.

05Aug 2010

RC10/RC22 Joint Panel, European Elections and the Internet, IPSA Conference, Luxembourg, 18-20 March 2010

11:51 - By Norbert Kersting - Events


European Parliament

European Elections and the Internet


Co-organisateurs: Norbert Kersting (Stellenbosch University) and Philippe J. Maarek (Université Paris Est - UPEC)
Saturday 20 March. Room M1. 9.00-12.00
Supported by IPSA RC 10 Electronic Democracy and RC 22 Political Communication

Website of the IPSA conference : http://luxembourg2010.org/

Outline:
The panel "European elections and the Internet" is proposed both by the RC10 "Electronic Democracy" and the RC22 "Political Communication". This panel issue is concerned with the use of e-democracy instruments during the last European elections in 27 countries in June 2009. The panel will analyse the implementation of e-campaigns and e-voting in different European countries. The Internet is often associated with the professionalization, diversification and increased inclusiveness in the voting process as well as the electoral campaigns. Problems of exclusion, trustworthiness and identity will be discussed as well as campaign related issues of targeting, personalisation, complexity and a trend to sound bytes and negative campaigning. The US presidential election 2009 were seen as a cornerstone in the use of e-campaigning. Is Europe adopting these strategies or are there new instruments? More precisely, we propose to explore five directions of research which are closely connected together. Staring with a general overview of electronic voting in relation to European elections the further focus is more on the professionalization of online campaigns. How useful is the internet in expanding the audiences through websites and social networks? Are new "participative campaigns" emerging substituting traditional "folkloric street campaigning"? Finally new E-tools to favour the formation of voters' preferences will be presented and analysed.

Papers:
i.Communicating Participation: The Institutional Communication On The Web In The European Elections 2009 (Tommaso Ederoclite, University of Naples "Federico II")

ii.Opportunity for Political Participation or Mimicry of Political Parties? The Internet Communication Of Political Youth Organizations During The EU Election Campaign 2009 (Fabienne Greffet, University of Nancy 2; Stéphanie Wojcik, University of Paris-Est Créteil)

iii.Informing, Engaging, Mobilising Or Interacting: Searching For A European Model Of Web Campaigning (Darren Lilleker, Bournemouth University; Karolina Koc Michalska, Sciences-Po, Paris – Nancy; Eva Schweitzer, University of Mainz; Michal Jacunski, Wroclaw University)

iv.The Real Political Power of the Internet: Facebook, a Possible New Hub of European Elections? (Marta Marcheva, IFP/CARISM Université Panthéon-Assas Paris II)

v.European Elections Online In Italy: Towards A Campaigning 2.0? (Giovanna Mascheroni, University of Torino; Sara Minucci, University of Torino)

vi.The impact of Voting Advice Applications on Voting (Alexander H. Trechsel, European University Institute)

05Aug 2010

RC10 "kick-off" meeting, Stellenbosch (South Africa), 22-24 January 2008

11:48 - By Norbert Kersting - Events


RC10Logo2.jpg

Electronic democracy.

State of the art and future agenda

22-24 January 2008
Stellenbosch (South Africa) at STIAS (Stellenbosch Institute for Advanced Studies)

RC 10 Acting chairs :
Prof. Norbert Kersting (Department of Political Science, Stellenbosch University, South Africa)
Prof. Harald Baldersheim (Department of Political Science, University of Oslo, Norway)
Dr. Kimmo Grönlund (Abo Akademi, Vasa, Finland)

The ongoing penetration of the Internet in private households since the 90’s led to high expectations using this instrument on strengthening democracy. The internet should enable a greater transparency and new ways of political communication.
The workshop provides an overview of the international pilot projects. The implementation of E-democracy in the different countries is also determined by political cultural aspects and legal regulations. The comparative analysis should also provide information, whether the instrument is useful for the improvement of the democratic process in different political cultural settings.

Programme

Tuesday 22.1.2008 Preliminary time table

13.00-14.00
Welcome and Introduction (Prof. Norbert Kersting, University of Stellenbosch)
14.00-16.30
1. E democracy- theory
Lawrence Pratchett, Prof. (De Montfort University, Leicester, UK) : E-citizenship
Monique Leyenaar, Prof. (University Nijmegen, Netherlands): E-democracy: blessing or curse?

16.30-18.30
2. Digital divide
Harald Baldersheim, Prof. (University of Oslo) / Morten Ögard (University of Agder, Norway): The digital divide in a centre-periphery perspective. Supply-side analyses
Fanie Cloete, Prof (University Stellenbosch): Overcoming the digital divide through strategic electronic government initiatives

Wednesday 23.1.2008

9.00-11.00
3. Electronic voting machines
Robert Krimmer (University Vienna): Electronic voting machines in comparative perspective
Sandeep Shastri (International Academy for Creative Teaching, Bangalore, India): Electronic voting machines in India

4. Internet-voting
11.00-13.00
Fernando Mendez (Center on Direct Democracy, Switzerland):Political experimentation using ICTs in Europe: Successes and failures in the roll-out of e-voting
Josep Reniu (University of Barcelona): E-voting: do we really need it?
14.00-16.00
R. Michael Alvarez (California Institute of Technology, USA) Thad E. Hall (University of Utah, USA): Internet Voting in the Estonian Context
Chantal Enguehard, Prof. (University of Nantes, France): Transparency in Electronic Voting : the Great Challenge

5. E-information
16.00-18.00
Kimmo Grönlund (Abo Academy, Finland): The Internet and Political Information
Belén Amadeo (University of Buenos Aires, Argentina): Online government communication in Argentina

Thursday 24.1.2008

9.00-11.00
Thomas Zittel (University of Mannheim, Germany): Lost in Technology? Political Parties and Online Campaigning in the German 2005 Parliamentary Elections
Javier Lorenzo Rodriguez, Prof (University Carlos III, Madrid, Spain): Electoral campaigns. Spain and Italy

6. E-participation and E-strategies
11.00-13.00
Kemi Ogunsola (University of Ibadan, Nigeria): Prospects and Challenges to e-Participation in Nigeria
Rosanna De Rosa/Fortunato Musella (University of Naples Federico II, Italy): Financing the e-democracy initiatives at the local level: national visions and subnational plans
14.00-16.00
Wolfgang Drechsler, Prof. (University Tartu, Estonia): Cyber Wars. Russia and Estonia
Anatoly Kulik (Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia): When Government Doesn't Want to Make Digital: Case of Russia
16.00-18.00
Conclusion: Future Agenda

Friday 25.1.2008

Excursion to Robben Island

Stellenbosch_2008.JPG

05Aug 2010

RC10 supported panel "(E)-deliberative model of European governance", IPSA Conference, Luxembourg, 18-20 March 2010

11:38 - By Norbert Kersting - Events


RC10Logo2.jpg

(E)-deliberative model of European governance in a Comparative Perspective

Co-chairs: Raphaël Kies (University of Luxembourg) and Patrizia Nanz (University of Bremen)
Friday, March 19, 2010. Room M1. 2:00pm-5:00pm
Supported by IPSA RC 10 Electronic Democracy

Website of the IPSA conference : http://luxembourg2010.org/

Outline:
As this is the case for the national and local level, we witness these last years an important increase of deliberative experiments - financed in large part by the European Commission, essentially through its plan D - inviting lay citizens to debate European issues. Among the most ambitious ones one should mention the Ideal-EU project that gathered approximately 500 young citizens from three European regions to discuss on-line and face-to-face about the climate change; the Europolis project that allowed 400 citizens from the 27 member states to meet in Brussels to debate some specific EU issues and answer to several questionnaires aiming at measuring the changing of their opinion; and the European Citizens Consultation project that allowed more than 100,000 EU citizens online and more than 1,500 citizens face-to-face to debate about the economic and social future of Europe through 27 national consultations. What these and other examples of public participation have in common is the idea to explore in a more qualitative way the priorities and preferences of European citizens, to reconnect European citizens with the rather elite-driven political sphere in Brussels and, more ambitiously, to include lay citizens in the EU decision-making process. But are the propositions elaborated by the citizens sufficiently informed and representative to be seriously taken into account in the EU decision-making process? Are the participative procedures sufficiently autonomous and a-political to promote a truly deliberative debate? And, more generally, to what extent such procedures that involve a limited amount of citizens constitute a move forward towards a more well-informed Europe?
The aim of this workshop will be provide some initial answers to these questions by comparing the ways in which these major deliberative-participatory processes were organized, and to evaluate to what extent they constitute valid practices of deliberative participation at the European level. In order to reflect on these different experiments, the participants at the workshop are invited to adopt a similar framework of analysis that looks at:

1) The emergence of such participatory experiments and their likelihood to be repeated or even institutionalized;
2) The democratic quality of these processes by referring to classical deliberative criteria (inclusiveness, representativeness, reciprocity etc.);
3) The specific "Europeanness" of deliberative processes by comparing for example whether they are affected by transnational versus national character of the debates;
4) Their impact on the larger (national) public spheres and/or on the EU decision making processes;
5) And, more generally, the way these could contribute (or not) to build a deliberative model of European governance.

Papers::
i.Rough Consensus: Assessing the Quality of Deliberation (Monique Leyenaar, Radboud University Nijmegen; Kees Niemöller, P&D Analytics)

ii.Citizens’ Agora – assessing the deliberative process and its impact on decision-making (Lea Roger, Helmut-Schmidt-University; Gary S. Schaal, Helmut-Schmidt-University)

iii.Talking With the Wind? Evidence On The Quality Of Deliberation In The Ideal-EU Project (Julien Talpin, CRESPPA/Paris 8 University; Laurence Monnoyer-Smith, Université de Techonologie de Compiègne)

iv.The Past and Future of Empowered Citizen Deliberation on Public Policy (John Gastil, University of Washington)

v.Coding Europolis with Discourse Quality Index (DQI) (Jurg Steiner, University of Bern)

vi.The Citizens’ Forum Europe – Assessing the Democratic Quality of Online Deliberations (Anna Wohlfarth, University Bielefeld)

02Apr 2009

RC10 meeting, IPSA World Congress, Santiago de Chile, 13-14 July 2009

05:49 - By Norbert Kersting - Events


Santiago fresco
RC 10 Acting chairs :
Prof. Norbert Kersting (Department of Political Science, Stellenbosch University, South Africa)
Prof. Harald Baldersheim (Department of Political Science, University of Oslo, Norway)
Dr. Kimmo Grönlund (Abo Akademi, Vasa, Finland)

Business meeting Tuesday, July 14, 2009 - 17:00-18.30 - FEN, H 202

Download report of RC10

PANEL 1

RC10.275 Electronic Democracy - Dilemmas of Change?
Monday, July 13, 2009 - 11:00 to 12:55 - FEN, H 005
Chair: Baldersheim, Harald - University of Oslo, Norway, harald.baldersheim@stv.uio.no
Discussant: Kersting, Norbert - Stellenbosch University, South Africa, kersting@sun.ac.za

Participants are invited to submit papers reflecting on choices and dilemmas that electronic governance might entail.A well-known dilemma is that of digital divides entailed by the spread of e-governance. Another example is that of easy access for citizens to large volumes of politically relevant information against problems of information overload. And will the rise of 24/7 politics over-saturate channels of communication to the extent that citzens are turned off? Will enhanced means of political scrutiny (e.g. electronic voting records) in the hands of citizens or pressure groups make life intolerable for the elected representatives? The panel is also open to other themes.

The Politics of Presence: A Comparative Analysis of Online and Face-to-Face Deliberation

Wojcik, Stéphanie - University of Paris XII - Val-de-Marne, France, stephanie.wojcik@univ-paris12.fr
Talpin, Julien - Compiègne University, France, julien.talpin@iue.it
Full Paper (English version)
Full paper (French version)

Electronic Government and Cyberdemocracy: the Degrees of Digital Democracy in Brazilian Capitals

Freire, Geovana - University of Fortaleza, Brazil, geovanacartaxo@hotmail.com
Feitosa, Gustavo Raposo P. - Universidade de Fortaleza, Brazil, gfeitosa@terra.com.br
Lopes, Francisco Cristiano - Universidade de Fortaleza, Brazil, chrysttiannus@hotmail.com
Abstract

Electronic Democracy: Potential and Challenges especially in the Context of Indian subcontinent

Yadav, Purnima - Patna University, India, purnimayadavmla@rediffmail.com
Abstract

Vulnerability Analysis of Three Remote Voting Procedures

Enguehard, Chantal - LINA, France, chantal.enguehard@univ-nantes.fr
Abstract

Democracy and Local Governance: Evidence from a Neighborhood

Iglesias, Ángel - University Rey Juan Carlos, Spain, angel.iglesias@urjc.es
Villoria, Manuel - Rey Juan Carlos University, Spain, manuel.villoria@urjc.es
Abstract

PANEL 2

RC10.301 E-democracy and Elections Part 1
Monday, July 13, 2009 - 15:00 to 16:55 - FEN, H 005
Chair: Kersting, Norbert - Stellenbosch University, South Africa, kersting@sun.ac.za
Discussant: Baldersheim, Harald - University of Oslo, Norway, harald.baldersheim@stv.uio.no

Electronic democracy is closely related to elections. The panel "Electronic democracy and elections" will analyze the information and transaction function of e-democracy in context with national elections. So the focus is on new trends in online campaigning and electronic voter information, but also on new experiments in electronic voter registration, online voting and voting computers. The panel would like to present global and regional trends and overviews but also in-depth case studies and evaluations in this field. The potentials, problems and experiences associated with "electronic electoral engeneering" in emerging democracies in "developing countries" as well as in "old democracies"will be analyzed 21st World Congress of Political Science

Electoral Reform in the 21st Century: Embracing ICT?

Leyenaar, Monique - Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands, m.leyenaar@fm.ru.nl
Abstract

Political experimentation using ICT’s in Europe: Successes and failures in the roll-out of e-voting

Mendez, Fernando - University of Zurich, Switzerland, fernando.mendez@zda.uzh.ch
Abstract

E-voting: analizing their sociopolitical acceptance

Reniu, Josep Mª - University of Barcelona, Spain, jreniu@ub.edu
Full paper

The electoral effects of Electronic Voting

Vander Weyden, Patrick - Ghent University, Belgium, patrick.vanderweyden@ugent.be
Abstract

Is i-voting a solution to diminishing voting turnout problem in Lithuania?

Ramonaite, Aine - Institute of International Relations and Political Science, Vilnius University, Lithuania,aine.ramonaite@tspmi.vu.lt
Full paper

Electronic Voting in Japan: 2002-2009

Iwasaki, Masahiro - Nihon University, Japan, iwasaki@mtj.biglobe.ne.jp
Full paper

PANEL 3

RC10.274 E-democracy and Elections Part 2
Tuesday, July 14, 2009 - 11:00 to 12:55 - FEN, H 201
Chair: Kersting, Norbert - Stellenbosch University, South Africa, kersting@sun.ac.za
Discussant: Baldersheim, Harald - University of Oslo, Norway, harald.baldersheim@stv.uio.no

The panel "Electronic democracy and elections II" analyzes the information and transaction function of e-democracy in context with national elections. The regional focus is on Northern and Latin America and the US in particular. In the US new trends in online campaigning became obvious. Are these heading towards new instruments of electronic voter information. new experiments in online voting and voting computers.

The Use of Information and Communciation Technology in Elections in the Russia, the United States and Venezuela

Krimmer, Robert - E-Voting.CC gGmbH, Austria, r.krimmer@e-voting.cc
Abstract

Satisfaction with Voting Technology and Election Administration in the 2008 U.S. Presidential Election

Niemi, Richard University of Rochester, niemi@rochester.edu
Hernson, Paul University of Maryland, pherrnson@capc.umd.edu
Full paper

Electronic Elections in a Politicized Polity

Hall, Thad, University of Utah, United States of America, thadhall@gmail.com
Alvarez, Michael - California Institute of Technology, United States of America, rma@hss.caltech.edu
Full paper

The Keys to the White House: Electronic Democracy and the Race for the Presidency of the United States

Solop, Frederic - Northern Arizona University, United States of America, fred.solop@nau.edu
Abstract

E-participation in Brazilian electoral campaign

Brandão, Francisco - Universidade de Brasília, Brazil, francisco.brandao@camara.gov.br
Batista, Carlos Marcos - Universidade de Brasília, Brazil, carlosmbatista@yahoo.com
Full paper

PANEL 4

RC10.221 Electronic Deliberation and Communication
Tuesday, July 14, 2009 - 15:00 to 16:55 - FEN, H 202
Chair: Leyenaar, Monique - Radboud University Nijmegen, The Netherlands, m.leyenaar@fm.ru.nl
Discussant: Mendez, Fernando - University of Zurich, Switzerland, fernando.mendez@zda.uzh.ch

The panel on "Electronic Deliberation and Communication" will analyse the ways in which the different political actors use the websites to reach the public opinion. How does the web summon people to support a certain person or to reject a specific policy? Can the citizens actually communicate better through the web? Has online participation replaced traditional political communication? How do people deliberate online? What do these websites look like? How do new information technologies (ITs) help to build stronger democracies?

Electronic deliberation is strongly related to new ITs that help to spread ideas throuhgout the web. Blogs, text messages, sites as Google Video or YouTube, social webs such as Facebook, Linkedin, MySpace, Hi5, and so on have become strong conveyors.

Variations in deliberativeness of Web-debates: Analysis of the external impact hypothesis

Kies, Raphaël - University of Luxembourg, Luxembourg, raphael.kies@uni.lu
Full paper

Configuring e-Parliaments from a Legislative Perspective. The Italian Case

De Rosa, Rosanna - University of Naples Federico II, Italy, rderosa@unina.it
Full paper

Political information and democratic governance through 10 governmental websites in Brazil.

Dias Bezerra, Heloisa - Universidade Federal de Goiás, Brazil, heloisadias@infolink.com.br
Lombardo Jorge, Vladimyr - Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro - PUC-Rio, Brazil, vljorge@uol.com.br
Full paper

The Entrepreneurs, the politics and the Web: mapping political activities on the websites of the Brazilian´s Federation of Industries

Braga, Sérgio - UFPR/Universidade Federal do Paraná, Brazil, ssbraga@uol.com.br
Nicolás, Maria Alejandra - Universidade Federal do Paraná, Brazil, alejandranicolas@gmail.com
Full paper

page 3 of 3 -