While looking for content on the online community’s reaction to SOPA and PIPA in January 2012,   I had happened to come across a contribution made by Amy Goodman to theguardian.com.  The following line immediately grabbed my attention. It captures how the people, the heart of today’s internet, reacted to what was seen as a very real threat to their online rights: 

“Information is the currency of democracy, and people will not sit still as moneyed interests try to deny them access.”   

 The EP also played its part in turning down a separate but international agreement later on in 2012, with Europeans also taking to the streets to protest against ACTA. Its decision to reject the agreement can be seen as one of the finer moments of an institution that is seen as removed from the reality of the Member States it represents.

These two events have pushed for what could have been a new era in the way the political establishment can engage citizens and at the same time become more open to them. The apparent threat to the availability of content online led to groups who previously were disinterested in politics to join the fray. The German Pirate Party, previously a small group of hackers, contested the Berlin elections and managed to win seats in the state’s legislature. Its electoral campaign focus stressed on issues that had not been addressed by other candidates, namely Intellectual Property and privacy rights as well as advocating the use of technology for citizens to check on how laws are being made in their communities. 

 It also backed its message of transparency and increased citizen participation with actions. The group’s policy agenda are developed on the input provided through an open-source platform, called Liquid Democracy. Its main selling point is based on proposals being built on collaborations and open to discussion or revision by party members. Taking a leaf out of the technology handbook, the platform can be seen as an exercise in practising what they had been preaching from the very start of the party’s foundation.

 The future seemed bright for the German Pirate Party.

 However, the group’s credibility has suffered from its dirty laundry being aired in public. Internal disputes spilled over onto Twitter. The infighting pushed away a large number of supporters which the party had campaigned hard to bring onboard. Revelations that US and European governments were spying on their citizens, issues supposed to be suited to the Pirates’ message, still failed to keep them relevant. Its failure to appeal to a wider voter base and address other issues relegated the movement to an interest group rather than a sign of things to come.   

 Yet, the short-lived success of the German Pirate Party does not have to mean that it should be treated as a footnote in the history books. Apart from being a case study and possibly a cautionary tale, their achievements show that political participation is no means best left in the hands of politicians.

 When it comes to the political establishment, social media is now a feature of how politicians are investing in reaching out to voters. As previously mentioned, practitioners are now aware that social capital is an important tool to building and keeping a good reputation. What social media has done is to put a ‘face’ on government. Although most public organisations run websites through which information is passed on, they still are impersonal. Social networks, on the other hand, allow for the public to get in touch with people in government, people with names and reputations who can answer questions and make commitments if possible.

 More importantly, social networks will remain one of the most effective channels for the people, to make their opinions known. Be it the launch of the latest Apple product or the US Federal shutdown in October, the ‘Twitterverse’ was quick to let Members of Congress know how the American public felt. In an industry deeply interested in approval ratings, politicians were given an indication of how things stood.

As technology continues to play a part in defining the way in which the political is reported, the potential for misinformation gives cause for concern. It cannot be denied that Google, and the internet as a whole, is the world’s largest depository of knowledge. Yet, over-reliance on sources which are not always verified for many a reason poses a number of challenges. The political establishment has to deal with the fact that online communication is a two-way stream which at times may be more like a digital game of pass the message.