The article in question deals with the effect public policies may have on the development of online communities. Hercheui (2010) examined the opinions of members of three Brazilian virtual communities that focused on environmental issues. The author notes that members of these virtual communities had similar values concerning leadership. The communities were created as groups where all members take an active (and equal) part in the decision-making process.
However, in reality, these organizations had several members who made all the decisions including participation in the funding project and other projects. Participation in the program affected the participants’ views and the structure of the communities making them more centralized. The power of leaders was legitimized after the participation in projects funded by the government. The author stresses that leaders had existed before the funding was obtained, but members of online communities started having more favorable views on the leadership. People accepted that the community could not exist without leaders as some decisions had to be made quickly.
However, it is difficult and even impossible to make decisions quickly if they are discussed by all members of the community. Hercheui (2010) used qualitative methods to collect and analyze data. Several members of three digital communities were interviewed.
One of the major strengths of the article is its use of qualitative tools. The researcher identifies ideas on the leadership of members of some virtual communities. The researcher analyzes possible factors that influence these ideas. Some public policies (those involving funding) can shape the structure of virtual communities and their members’ ideas on leadership. The author provides direct quotes that help the reader to understand the participants’ views, emotions, and so on. The use of interviews ensures that detailed information on the matter is collected.
As for the weaknesses of the article, it lacks important data. First, the methodology used is not described clearly. The number of participants is not mentioned. At that, it is clear that this number is not significant, which makes it impossible to generalize the data provided. The results can apply to the three communities that were analyzed, and different opinions can exist within other virtual communities.
It is possible to note that the article can have several implications for society. For example, the findings show that although democratic values are promoted within digital communities, they are not followed in some important aspects. The communities that are often created as platforms for sharing ideas and making decisions collectively still have a group of leaders who make the majority of decisions. The most important implication for the society related to this finding is that members of virtual communities will start paying more attention to their leaders, as well as their responsibilities and rights.
Governments will also understand that they can have a significant influence on the development of any virtual community shaping its agenda, structure, and so on. Members of these communities tolerate intrusion in their community’s operations when certain funding is provided. So, communities may start developing strategies to avoid any possible intrusions. The article includes some examples of the communities that achieved these goals. These groups did not change their structure significantly during and after the funding was provided. Finally, the article can be used as the starting point of a larger study. It can be beneficial to explore the views of members of more communities.
Reference List
Hercheui, MD 2010, ‘A study on how public policies affect legitimacy in virtual communities’, Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 7-21. Web.