Introduction
The rise of e- politics materialised in the late 1990’s up to the early twenty first century as brought about by the races by presidential candidates. Consequently, an increase in the population utilizing internet to gather news, as well as; carry out research on the substitutes for policies rose gradually due to the diffusion in technology (Klotz 2004, p. 30).
It is noteworthy that recently the internet has risen as a mode of enhancing political participation. Internet platform also helps in the facilitation of a number of political actions, which were initially communicated by use of conventional methods such as post mail, telephone or face to face.
As a result, intellectuals have argued that the consequences of the utilization of internet will ensure that the reduction in the current downhill tendency that has been experienced in public commitment is achieved (Johnson & Kaye 2003, p. 20). This can be done through creation of a more convenient and less costly alternative to traditional outlets (Dimaggio et al 2001, p. 320).
Though some scholars have argued that the e- politics is not viable in a population that is stratified in such a way that some people have more wealth than others, other scholars strongly argue that it has its positive side. The main aim of this study is to find out if the utilization of e- politics by politicians, as well as journalists has changed the nature of political communication in Australia in terms of its effects on the citizens.
Effects of the utilisation of e- politics on Australia’s political communication
In order to understand the effect that the use of e-politics by politicians, journalists and citizens would have on Australia’s political communication, it is important to understand a key terms like political communication. In this case it refers to an interactive procedure which deals with the transmission of information among politicians, the news media and the public (Jessop 1998, p. 20).
The approach in transmission of information is top- down whereby the information being transmitted comes from the government officials and links in a horizontal manner with the political actors. Moreover, it also gets transmitted in a bottom-up approach where information comes from the public to the government by use of public opinion. Political communication is characterised by production, contents, as well as; effects (Klotz 2004, p. 28).
E- Politics refers to the utilization of Information Communication Technology in the political process. The utilization of e-politics has been on the rise around the world. Countries which have adopted the e-politics include countries like the UK, America, and Australia (Coleman 2003, p. 35).
The use of Information Communication technology can transform political communication in a country like Australia in a number of ways. This is more so when it comes to the part played by the parliaments. It is expected that e- politics will change political communication in Australia in a number of ways which include; disinter arbitration and direct democracy (Kingdon 2003, p.35).
In this case Information Communication Technology helps to circumvent political arbitrators like the political parties, as well as; agents through facilitation of more straight forms of ruling the masses by use of voting referenda and polling (Bellamy and Raab 2004, p. 400).
E- Politics will also ensure that political communication gets modernised and ensure that the democracy is consumerist such that parliaments, as well as, their agents are able to revise their representation and make an improvement in the delivery of services (Bellamy 2000, p. 87).
Utilization of e- politics in Australia has been on the increase. Its utilization is such that it is Innovative, to suit the political climate in Australia. In this case Australia’s political climate is characterised by great detachment as observed in the case of electorates occupying a large area in terms of geography and thus making it difficult for one to communicate (Newman 2001, p. 49).
As a result, this poses a problem to the parliaments to utilise modern technology in order to get rid of the blockades present in form of time and space (Pierre 2000, p. 40). Another reason for the cause of innovation in Australia’s e- politics is the fact that regimes in Australia were initially viewed as one of the pioneers in e- government policy and had initially been praised for the approach (Newman 2001, p. 50).
Lastly, the Federal Parliament in Australia is such that it had been built for the computer age and so far it had better baseline services (Newman 2001, p. 52). A lot of hope has been pegged on e-politics by politicians, as well as; journalists who believe that it will transform political communication.
While it is expected that e- politics will change Australia’s politics to some extent there are doubts whether it will have any impact on Australia’s politics. This can be seen by the fact that the internet has not been widely used in Australia given the allegiance that party members have to their political parties. In this case party members are not easily influenced by campaigns put up by other parties through the conventional ways such as face to face communication and campaign through forms of media like radios and televisions.
Moreover, even with the upcoming technology, die hard followers of certain political parties cannot abandon their political parties on the basis of campaigns they get from the internet as they even avoid these sites. However, there are instances where it has been used, for example; during the 1996 Australian Federal Election where it used the internet as a means of communication as early as November 1994 November.
Nevertheless, these sites got a number of criticisms due to the presence of information that was outdated (Australia Politics and Elections Database 2011, p. 1). Though the internet as a means of political communication was not used widely during the 1996 elections it was hoped that during the next elections, presence of greater utilisation of the internet will be observed (Australia Politics and Elections Database 2011, p. 1).
In the 2007 general elections the internet was used to a large extent by the politicians whereby the first Federal election embraced the Web 2.0 applications. During the elections in 2007 the key political parties made use of social networking sites such as MySpace, Facebook and You Tube (Australia Politics and Elections Database 2011, 1).
However a political party like Australian Lab or Party’s (ALP) had invested in online campaign through its website www.Kevin07.com whereby its main aim was to sway the young voters. Despite the fact that it has a great following from the young population it relied heavily on the internet.
Citizens have utilised the internet to obtain information on Australia’s politics as well as campaign, for their favourite candidates. This can be seen in the hyper local citizen journalism service youdecide2007.org, which covered the 2007 Australian Federal Election. This ensures that local issues, national political issues, as well as; community issues are talked about and thus enhancing social democracy.
Moreover, the citizens’ air their views on politics through personal blogs and this is cannot be easily tracked by the politicians. Journalists in Australia have also made use of the internet by posting videos of politicians on line that could have made remarks that would annoy the citizens. As a result, the government has resorted to come up with laws to control information that is posted online but it has not been successful (Australia Politics and Elections Database 2011, 1).
In cases where e- politics has been utilised in Australia it has had an effect on the populace in terms of the message communicated. It is noteworthy that in every community, communication is part and parcel of every community. In order for the society to exchange information, communication has to take place. The information exchanged is mainly controlled by the political class all over the world and this also applies to the case of Australia. Nevertheless, in recent times the rise of e-politics has changed political communication.
In democracies like Australia the main link between the citizens and the government is the political party. The political parties convey information to the citizens through the media which they can control.
However, in the recent times an increase in the utilization of the internet by citizens who act as citizen journalists to spread their political agenda has been witnessed. Other groups like Non- Governmental organisations have also come up to air their views on politics through the internet. This becomes very difficult for politicians as they have no control over the information that is made public through the internet (Australia Politics and Elections Database 2011, p.1).
Political communication in Australia has changed such that the link between the government and the citizens is no longer the political party as it was traditionally, as many groups have come up to inform the citizens about Australia’s politics.
In turn the government has lost control over what is discussed in the new media unlike traditionally where they could control information as they put barriers on what political activities were to be made public by the traditional media which was mainly television broadcast, newspaper articles, magazines and the radio.
In this case any political message that was discussed by the journalists had to be edited to fit the governments agenda but today with the rise of new technology this is not possible and the government has to be creative in the way it handles e-politics (Coleman 2003, p. 25). Due to the pressure the government faces from the rise of e-politics, one way it has chosen to adapt is through appointment of delegates.
In order for the general populace to get involved in e-politics an awareness campaign has to be made to them. It had been expected that the organisations in Australia would be actively involved in communication, as well as; in ensuring that the utility of innovation in the process of communication is present, a study carried out in Australia proved otherwise.
Regions that were known to be actively involved and innovative in political communication include areas such as Queensland (McConnell 2003, p. 45). In this case, it has a wide range of e-democracy that has been integrated into the institutions.
The e-democracy is such that it originates from the high ranking leaders plus an e-government that is present with minimum participation of the parliament. Furthermore, the federal parliament in Australia has seen a virtual deficiency or tactic for Information Communication Technology (Australia Politics and Elections Database 2011, p. 1).
The Electorates, according to studies carried out in Australia, concerning the new media, not much proof was shown on the impact that the novel medium would have on those represented as opposed to the representatives (Coleman 2003, p. 25). A study was carried out on the online behaviour and the impact of utilisation of Information Communication Technology and the internet to gather data on the representative system.
The study showed that while Information Communication Technology as means of getting in touch with the parliamentarians, a preference was made of traditional ways of communication which includes telephone, face to face communication, and letters over the use of Information Communication Technology (Marsh 1998, p. 50). As a result, making any kind of contacts by use of the internet is a preserve of the middle class who involve themselves with political matters.
On the other hand, it is possible that there will be an increase in the use of internet through e-mail to e-mail communication among the young generation. A crack is also present between the objective and real contact actions (Australia Politics and Elections Database 2011, p. 1). Consequently, this shows that the representatives are reluctant when it comes to make contact by use of e-mail and, as a result, the larger population does not make much use of Information Communication Technology.
Nevertheless, according to the study carried out, the new form of media still present major obstacles in the form of technical skills and accessibility for many citizens. To this extent e-politics by politicians can be said not to have changed fundamentally the political communication as the parliamentarians prefer the traditional ways of communication.
Moreover, the population that has access to Information Communication Technology is small in number (Australia Politics and Elections Database 2011, p. 1). However, when this is compared to a country like Britain those people who visits the parliamentarians websites are few as compared to Australia.
This can be explained by the fact that only 5% of population in Britain who had access to the internet paid a visit to the Westminster site. (Australia Politics and Elections Database 2011, p. 1). In the case of Australia, only fourteen per cent of the population that had access to the internet visited a government’s site and only nine per cent of the population with an access to the internet paid a visit to a parliamentarian’s site (Australia Politics and Elections Database 2011, p. 1).
The attitude that the populace have on the utilisation of new media will have an impact on the degree to which they engage in e-politics. A study done in Australia on the attitude they had towards new media showed that they were eager and first made a reference to the government in what it has to say about a particular issue. According to the study carried out there is proof that the populace involved in e-politics is small as they are mainly dependent in conventional ways to engage in political communication.
The danger in this is that this will aggravate the existing division, if organisations maintain politics as a common tactic. Nevertheless, the study showed that there is possibility that new Information Communication Technology will involve the populace and it is expected that the government institution and the political representatives will ensure that provision of information, as well as, services is done online.
Nevertheless, a crack is present in the fact that theoretical support does not translate to actual utilization of the internet with the absence of inducement for users and marketing and mobilisation tactics from agents (Australia Politics and Elections Database 2011, p. 1).
Representative democracy has been fluctuating and it is unclear the course which the structure of representation will take. The notion of uniform model of representation built around societal deference and trust may not make a comeback, however; the idea of disappearance of the parliament is not possible.
It is apparent that the politicians are having a huge workload and Information Communication Technology has added the workload they already have (Castell 1996, p. 20). The paradox here is that despite the fact that political systems have become complicated, the function of mediators in giving guidance to citizens through representations and policy web and provision of leadership which is very important.
However, Information Communication Technology will lead to an increase in candidness, data and accessibility for a section of the population but this in turn places strains and pressures on the scheme of illustration. There are several challenges facing the government systems and they need to be dealt with by parliaments and parliamentarians (Castell 1996, p. 22).
First since Information Communication Technology is first in mobilising people it can be used in instances where it is used to cause chaos. Secondly, it makes the voice louder for those already in politics and this could pose a threat in perpetuating and in some cases aggravates pre existing participatory divisions.
Thirdly, it could lead to disintegration in this case the fact that Information Communication Technology is only accessed by a section of a certain population means that it is most likely that their issues will be addressed as opposed to other people who have no access to Information Communication Technology.
Lastly, people might have high prospects of online action from representatives and representative organisations but cannot understand the formal processes or restrictions under which the parliamentarians operate. Again, the risk is that Information Communication Technology will heighten discontent if representatives fail to reply or carry on with existing tradition.
Conclusion
From the above discussion it is clear that the utilisation of e- politics by journalists, politicians and citizens has changed the nature of political communication fundamentally. Traditionally the citizens could only get information from the politicians through the political parties which acted as a link between the citizens and the government. This took place through the media which had some restrictions put on it as to what is newsworthy to the public according to the politicians view.
Nevertheless, technology has changed all this as citizens can get updated about political activities through the internet. On the other hand the journalists have turned to the internet to broadcasts activities by the politicians which would be scorned upon once it is broadcasted in the traditional media. The politicians on the other hand have had to content with the new trend in the media by getting involved in the new technology.
This can be seen the fact that they have used the internet to campaign. It should also be noted that the impact of utilisation of e- politics by citizens can only have an effect if they are much involved in e-politics as some sections of the populace are not bothered about Information Communication Technology to learn about politics.
References
Australia Politics and Elections Database. 2011, New South Wales 2011 Election Results. 29 December. 2007. Retrieved from http://elections.uwa.edu.au/.
Bellamy, C & Raab, P 2004, Joined-up Government and Privacy in the United Kingdom: Managing Tensions between Data Protection and Social Policy, Part II, Public Adminstration Volume 83. No. 2, pp 393- 415.
Bellamy, C 2000, ‘ The Politics of Public Information Systems’, in G.D. Garson (ed) Handbook of Public Information systems, CQ Press: Washington DC.
Castell, M 1996, The Rise of the Network Society: Economy, Society and Culture (1). Blackwell: Oxford.
Coleman, S 2003, (ed) The E- Connected World: Opportunities and Risks, McGill University Press: Montreal.
Dimaggio, PR, Hargittai, EC, Nuemann, WT & Robinson, JC 2001, Social implications of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 307-336.
Jessop, B 1998, ‘ The rise of Governance and the Risk of Failure: The Case of Economic Development,’ International Social Science Journal 50(155): 29-45.
Johnson, T. & Kaye, B 2003, A boost or bust for democracy: How the Web influenced political attitudes in the 1996 and the 2000 presidential elections. Harvard Journal of Press/Politics, 8, 9-34.
Kingdon, J 2003, Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. Longman: New York.
Klotz, R 2004 The politics of international communication. Lanhan, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Marsh, D 1998, ‘ The Development of the Policy Network Approac’, in D. March (ed.) Comparing Policy Networks, pp. 3-17. Open University Press: Buckingham, 1998.
McConnel, A 2003, Overview: Crisis Management, Influence, Responses and Evaluation’, Parliamentary Affairs 56 (3): 393- 409.
Newman, J 2001, Modernising Governance: Authority, Steering and Democracy. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
Pierre, J 2000, (ed). Debating Governance: Authority, Steering and Democracy. Oxford University Press: Oxford.