User:Candreaangulo/sandbox

Possible Articles to Work On

Option 1

E-government

Although the article referred to neutral sources and included a detailed description of E-government, I believe it could improved by including more references to drawbacks experienced by E-government systems. All in all, the examples of the article itself are great because it isn't limited to technical examples, but it also includes situational examples.

E-government

Option 2

Once-only principle

The "Once-only principle" refers to the limited encoded-authorization of citizen data, where the information provided from citizens due to privacy reasons. The article offered an excellent neutral stance for the principle because it offered two points of view and also referred to situational examples in countries.

Once-only principle

Option 3

eRulemaking

The article provides a concise outlook of eRulemaking. The basic information is covered, however, there's a lack of content regarding the negatives experience of this concept in comparison to implementations with positive results.

ERulemaking

References Electronic Government. [Electronic Resource] : Performance Measures for Projects Aimed at Promoting Innovation and Transparency Can Be Improved : Report to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate. U.S. Govt. Accountability Office, 2011. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=cat04202a&AN=ucb.b18567068&site=eds-live.

Finalize your topic/Find your sources

After all, I decided to work on the article "E-democracy" because it lacks descriptions of a worldwide view of the subject since July 2016. In addition, under the section of "Improving democracy", there's a flag stating that perspectives on that section deal only with the United States and it doesn't represent the worldwide perspective. This one hasn't been fixed since August 2017.

Talk page: Talk:E-democracy

Bibliographies:

Prins, C., et al. Digital Democracy in a Globalized World. Edward Elgar Publishing, 2017. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=nlebk&AN=1606855&site=ehost-live. MLA Hindman, Matthew. The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton University Press, 2008. Project MUSE muse.jhu.edu/book/61871.

Start drafting your contributions : E-democracy

I'll be making improvements to the article titled E-democracy, which lacks an overall point-of-view. This flag has been there since 2016 for the Goals and Improving Democracy sections. Also, I've left underlined the improvements I made to the article. The link to the article is:E-democracy
Accordint to Human Rights and Democracy, democracy not only promotes such fundamental American values such as religious freedom and worker rights, but also helps create a more secure, stable, and prosperous global arena in which the United States can advance its national interest". ^[1]The goal of E-democracy as a form of human right is established a principle to help people voice their opinion and social media facilitates the process of free speech and democracy, not only with voicing opinions on social issues, but executing this rights through voting too.
Social media platforms encourage the use of free speech democracy by fostering movements of exposure about social movements and speaking up for unfair treatment and policy issues according to a person's ideals and experiences. The digital revolution creates new opportunities for limiting and controlling forms of cultural participation and interaction. ^[2] Democracy, more than the representation of an institution allows for fair participation in issues involving individuals to share ideas and their opinions, supporting human rights. The United Nations in "The Age for Digital Interdependence" states that the spread of digital technologies has already improved the world in a myriad ways. It has, for example, revolutionized the ability to communicate with others and to share and access knowledge. ^[3] Every existing individual has the right to access information, therefore, has the access to voice their opinion and digital democracy permits it an easier and strategized manner.

The spread of free information through the internet has encouraged freedom and human development. The internet is used for promoting human rights—including free speech, religion, expression, peaceful assembly, government accountability, and the right of knowledge and understanding—that support democracy. An e-democracy process has been recently proposed in a scientific article^[4] for solving a question that has crucial importance for all humans in the 21st century: "As planet Earth citizens, will you stop the climate from warming?" The author proposes to use a cell-phone for answering this question during the Olympic Games in Pyeongchang 2018 and Tokyo 2020.

E-democracy in 2020

The COVID-19 pandemic to a greater extent has made “E (Electronic)-Democracy” more relevant and influential than ever before. Social media has transformed and moved democratic processes from conventional physical spaces to virtual and digitalized ones.In 2020,^[5] COVID-19 impacted the world in a pandemic, forcing countries around the world to implement safety measures according to public health officials. The sudden change in society limited social movement activities, leading to a momentary pause in political issues, However, thanks to digital platforms such as Instagram, Facebook, or Twitter, individuals continue to voice their opinions, create exposure for social movements, and intend to foster change and raise awareness through democracy in social media. According to the Asean Post the advent of COVID-19 pandemic, where access to conventional democratic spaces such as public meetings, and other social media political g5atherings ins constrained and limited, Filipinos have turned to social media, digital media, collaborative platfoms and the like in carrying out public affairs and exercising "active citizenship" virtually. ^[5] This change allows for active engagement in social, written, or visual interaction and correcting misinformation virtually.

Expanding democracy[edit]

The Internet has several attributes that encourage thinking about it as a democratic medium. Electronic voting should be done with a proper purpose and with achieving a common constitutional goal. Most importantly, expanding democracy should help outweigh the advantages of e-voting compared to traditional ballots^[6]. E-democracy would contribute to the access to knowledge. The lack of centralized control makes censorship difficult. There are other parallels in the social design in the early days of the internet, such as the strongly libertarian support for free speech, the sharing culture that permeated nearly all aspects of Internet use, and the outright prohibition on commercial use by the National Science Foundation. Another example is the unmediated mass communication on the internet, such as through newsgroups, chat rooms, and MUDs. This communication ignored the boundaries established with broadcast media, such as newspapers or radio, and with one-to-one media, such as letters or landline telephones. Finally, because the Internet is a massive digital network with open standards, universal and inexpensive access to a wide variety of communication media and models could actually be attained.

Some practical issues involving e-democracy include: effective participation; voting equality at decision stage; enlightened understanding; control of the agenda; and inclusiveness. Systemic issues may include cyber-security concerns and protection of sensitive data from third parties.

Improving democracy

Modern democracies are generally representative democracies, where citizens elect representatives to manage the creation and implementation of laws, policies, and regulations on their behalf, in contrast to direct democracies in which citizens retain that responsibility. They may be referred to as more or less "democratic" depending on how well the government represents the will or interest of the people. A shift to e-democracy would in effect devolve political power from elected representatives to the individual.

In America, politics have become reliant on the Internet because the Internet is the primary source of information for most Americans. The Internet educates people on democracy, helping people stay up to date with what is happening in their government. Online advertising is becoming more popular for political candidates and group's opinions on propositions.^[7] For many the Internet is often the primary resource for information. The reason for this, and especially among younger voters, is that it is easy and reliable when used correctly, thus lowering an individual's workload. The innate usability of search engines, such as Google, results in increased citizen engagement with research and political issues. Social networks allow people to express their opinions about the government through an alias, anonymously and judgment-free.^[8] Due to the Internets' size and decentralized structure, any individual has the potential to go viral and gain influence over a large number of others.

In Canada, there was a delay in getting the Conservative leadership results because machines chewed up ill-fitting ballots.^[9]

The Internet enables citizens to get and post information about politicians, and it allows those politicians to get advice from the people in larger numbers. This collective decision making and problem-solving gives more power to the citizens and helps politicians make decisions faster. This creates a more productive society that can handle problems faster and more efficiently. Getting feedback and advice from the American population is a large part of a politician's job and the Internet allows them to function effectively with larger numbers of people's opinions. With this heightened ability to communicate with the public, the American government is able to function more capably and effectively as a Democracy.^[10]

The American election of 2016 is an example, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton made good use of Twitter, attempting to shape perceptions on their behalf, whilst using social media to transmit the idea that authorities are also ‘normal’, and they can communicate through a Twitter account just like everyone does. In other words, nowadays, any ordinary person can research on political causes and events at any time just by searching something on Google. Also, the various different forms of sharing one’s political beliefs through interactive chats and online posts on social media, such as Facebook, Twitter and Instagram, connects people who part one’s same views (Sarwar & Soomro, 2013, pp. 216–226)^[11]

Generation X became disillusioned that even large-scale public protests such as the UK miners' strike (1984–1985) were seen to fail a decade before information technology became generally available to individual citizens.^[12] E-democracy is sometimes seen as a remedy to the insular nature, concentrated power, and lack of post-election accountability in traditional democratic process organized mostly around political parties.^{[citation needed]} Tom Watson, the Deputy Leader of the UK Labour Party, said:

It feels like the Labour frontbench is further away from our members than at any point in our history and the digital revolution can help bring the party closer together ... I'm going to ask our NEC to see whether we can have digital branches and digital delegates to the conference. Not replacing what we do but providing an alternative platform. It's a way of organising for a different generation of people who do their politics differently, get their news differently.^[13]

Disruption in E-Democracy

E-democracy, or digital democracy platforms expand the opportunity to exercise voting rights in political elections. For instance, digital voting platforms have received attacks from hacker parties in the intend to change a political election's outcome. "Cybersecurity threats to the integrity of both electoral mechanisms and government institutions are, quite uncomfortably, more intangible."^[14] On the other hand, ballots are the safest ways to approach an election but digital voting gives citizens the advantage to vote electronically and constant innovations and inputs from third parties is needed.

Digital Inclusion

Digital Inclusion is essential for citizen participation in public policy formulation for a healthy Digital Democracy through equal participation of all section of society in any democracy irrespective of citizen's income level, education level, gender, religion, color, race, language used, physical and mental health etc. Any public policy formulated without including any specific section of society will always remain non-inclusive by nature which will go against the ethos of democracy.^[15]

Response to peer reviews

Ian, A Wiki Educator, said: "Hi. I think that if you want to globalize the content, you shouldn't open with a quote like this one: Democracy not only promotes such fundamental American values such as religious freedom and worker rights but also helps create a more secure, stable, and prosperous global arena in which the United States can advance its national interest. Start with the bigger-picture things, and then talk country-specific information lower down as you go into more depth and detail." Ian (Wiki Ed) (talk) 20:33, 7 October 2020 (UTC) "

1. "I think that if you want to globalize the content, you shouldn't open with a quote like this one: Democracy not only promotes such fundamental American values such as religious freedom and worker rights, but also helps create a more secure, stable, and prosperous global arena in which the United States can advance its national interest."
2. - Ian pointed out the opening quote for the "Definition" section under the E-democracy article emphasizes the United States only and not a global view of the subject, as I intended initially. To fix this, I plan to search and review more sources that provide a broad overview of E-Democracy. Although I am researching OskiCat's database only, I'll delve deeper to include a worldwide perspective.
3. "Start with the bigger-picture things, and then talk country-specific information lower down as you go into more depth and detail." To address this recommendation of the Wiki Educator, I'll revise the new sources I'll collect and include them for the worldwide view introduction. After that, I'd like to have information from general continents and not countries more a broad yet specific outlook, not limited to a single country. Lastly, Jasdeep recommended that I explain and avoid citing the quotation directly, making sure I fix it. Some of the new sources I'm considering are: “E-Democracy in the European Union: Lessons from Estonia.” Foreign Policy Research Institute, www.fpri.org/article/2018/02/e-democracy-european-union-lessons-estonia/. Malindog-Uy, Anna, and Anna Rosario Malindog-Uy is Professor of Political Science. “Social Media And E-Democracy In A Pandemic.” The ASEAN Post, 30 July 2020, theaseanpost.com/article/social-media-and-e-democracy-pandemic.
   

This is a user sandbox of Candreaangulo. You can use it for testing or practicing edits. This is not the place where you work on your assigned article for a dashboard.wikiedu.org course. Visit your Dashboard course page and follow the links for your assigned article in the My Articles section. Get Help

1. "Human Rights and Democracy". United States Department of State. Retrieved 2020-10-07.
2. Balkin, Jack (2004). "Digital Speech and Democratic Culture A Theory of Freedom of Expression for the Information Society" (PDF).
3. United, Nations. "The Age of Digital Interdependence" (PDF).
4. Zanella, A (2017). "Humans, humus, and universe". Appl. Soil Ecol. 123: 561–567. doi:10.1016/j.apsoil.2017.07.009.
5. "Social Media And E-Democracy In A Pandemic". The ASEAN Post. Retrieved 2020-10-07.
6. Prins, Corien; Rosina, Mônica; Cuijpers, Colette; Lindseth, Peter (2017). "Digital Democracy in a Globalized World". doi:10.4337/9781785363962. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
7. Chung-pin Lee; Kaiju Chang; Frances Stokes Berry (9 May 2011). "Testing the Development and Diffusion of E-Government and E-Democracy: A Global Perspective". Public Administration Review. 71 (3): 444–454. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6210.2011.02228.x.
8. Oral, Behçet(2008). "Computers & Education: The evaluation of the student teachers' attitudes toward the Internet and democracy." Dicle University, Volume 50, Issue 1: 437-445.
9. "Diane Francis: Digital democracy is within our grasp". Financial Post. Retrieved 2020-10-07.
10. Matt Leighninger (2 May 2012). "Citizenship And Governance In A Wild, Wired World: How Should Citizens And Public Managers Use Online Tools To Improve Democracy?". National Civic Review. 100 (2): 20–29. doi:10.1002/ncr.20056.
11. "European Journal of Scientific Research". www.europeanjournalofscientificresearch.com. Retrieved 2020-04-15.
12. John Keane (27 March 2012). "The politics of disillusionment: can democracy survive?". The Conversation. Retrieved 9 October 2013.
13. Waugh, Paul (30 July 2015). "Tom Watson Interview: On Jeremy Corbyn, Tony Blair, Leveson, Digital Democracy; And How He Sleeps At Night". The Huffington Post. Retrieved 10 February 2016.
14. Dobrygowski, Daniel. "Governance through the digital disruption of democracy". ORF. Retrieved 2020-10-07.
15. "Why the UN's e-government survey in India needs to better understand the idea of digital inclusion". South Asia @ LSE. 2019-03-05. Retrieved 2019-06-27.