Media Democracy

How is the historical development of representative democracy (liberalism and civic republicanism) important for understanding the contemporary crisis of democracy?

Understanding the historical development of representative democracy is pertinent to scholars. Scholars can determine for what reasons democracy was conceived and thus establish flaws that undermine it today. Proponents of democracy envisioned a society where equality, respect for human rights, and prudent representation of all people in ruling authorities were observed. Classical liberalism stressed the need to respect individual rights, freedom, and free markets through capitalism. John Locke believed in constitutionalism, inalienable rights- freedom and equality of all human beings, and a social contract between the rulers and ruled.  John Stuart Mill participated in the development of democracy through his advancement of ideologies of utilitarianism and consequentialism. Stuart Mill opined that the actions of an entity should be measured based on outcomes and that such outcomes should be in favor of the majority. In essence, democracy is a rule of the people, by the people for the people (Meeta Rani, Lecture- Public Sphere-Liberalism, 26, 2020).

An analysis of the factors that led to the development of democracy reveals that the envisioned purpose has not been met. For instance, the creation of a market economy that encourages survival for the fittest has disadvantaged low-income earners. Corporations and wealthy entrepreneurs benefit from capitalism by paying less for labor and charging high for finished products. Low salaries are meant to ensure that laborers do not advance to become employers but remain sources of labor. Furthermore, democracy sought to ensure political equality and the pursuit of common goals. Governments formed through democracies disadvantaging minority communities characterize the contemporary crisis of democracy. For example, in the United States, the interests of minority communities such as immigrants, native Indians, and African-Americans have been the least represented in government affairs.

The media is an integral part of democracy since it provides people with crucial information that allows them to participate in public discourse. For instance, citizens can judge the character of their leaders and their visions. Media also informs the public about their rights, freedom, and civic responsibilities to their country. Such civic virtues include inspiring citizens to perform tasks for the common. Sometimes the media has discarded their civic duties and become profit-oriented supporting neo-liberal politics that guarantee their existence (Schroeder, 2018).

Question 2: How has the development of the internet and information technology (digital media) resulted in the rise of right-wing populism across the globe? (25 points)

In the twenty-first century, the impact of technology on politics cannot be underestimated. In particular, digital media has successfully been used to circumvent traditional media aiding in the shift in political direction. Ralph Schroed (2018) points out that the successes of Donald Trump becoming a Republican candidate and consequently winning the United States presidency can be credited to his domination of social media through twitter to bypass traditional media gatekeepers. For example, President Trump was able to promote messages that would be considered unacceptable by mainstream media. Populists perceive themselves to be virtuous people who are underrepresented by juxtaposing themselves as noble against a corrupt populace. Consequently, populists are often against the mainstream media. By the use of social media, right-wing populists depict themselves as victims of corrupt government systems that should be torn down and replaced by more transparent systems. Populists posit that only they can affect the required changes.

In the United States, President Donald Trump consistently portrayed himself as a victim of witch-hunt from the left-wing democrats, investigative agencies, and mainstream media, which gives him negative publicity. Nevertheless, through Twitter, Donald trump shapes political discourses, which become subjects of discussion in mainstream media and official government operations. It should be emphasized that the accessibility of the internet and smart devices have significantly increased in the 21st century. Similarly, more people spend most of their time on smartphones making it easy for populist agendas to reach the people.

Kathleen Blee and Kimberly Creasap confirm that digital media promotes the advancement of right-wing populism through the creation of alternative media that provides virtual communities (Blee & Creasap, 277). For instance, populists use the internet, such as Twitter and Facebook, to spread propaganda to supporters and the public to gain new supporters. Populists also advance their agendas by appealing to nationalism, cultural attitudes, and emotions that draw people towards shared understandings of politics and lifestyle (Blee & Creasap, 278). For instance, in the United States, populists, including President Trump, use digital media to portray Left-wing politicians as impediments to the development and stability of the nation. Nevertheless, populists cunningly leave out established billionaires who enjoy significant tax cuts at the expense of middle-class citizens. Furthermore, populists use digital media to appeal to heightened emotions (Jha Rani, Democracy Ideology Media, and Populism, 2020). In the height of continued terror attacks in the United States, President Trump capitalized on people’s anger and emotions to justify the ethnic profiling of Muslims and continued military invasion in the Middle East.

References

Jha, Meeta Rani. (2020). Democracy Ideology Media and Populism.

Kathleen M. Blee & Kimberly A. Creasap. (2010). Conservative and Right-Wing Movements. Annual Review of Sociology, 46, 269-286.

Meeta Rani . (2020). Lecture- Public Sphere-Liberalism.

Schroeder, R. (2018). Chapter Title: Digital media and the rise of right-wing populism. In Social Theory after the Internet (pp. 60-81). UCL Press.