In the book, Computer Ethics (Third Edition) by Deborah G. Johnson, the author explains three arguments that support the claim that the Internet is a democratic technology. “A democratic technology” is the idea of citizens, rather than a dictator or aristocracy, having a high degree of freedom and say in the governments that rule them in relation to technology. These citizens also believe policies regulating the Internet should uphold to that of democratic values and beliefs.

The first argument that supports the idea that the Internet is a democratic technology is how it differs from other forms of communication as it enables unmediated, many-to-many communications. Many-to-many communications is when one person can communicate too many people through the use of the Internet. This communication is unfiltered by the government or the news media. This is democratic in the way the user has the freedom to express him or herself when communicating with others on the internet.

The second argument that supports a democratic technology is that the information is power. The many-to-many communication is giving a person power to distribute their information (or message) to many people. As long as this information is useful and correct, it can be empowering to persuade or inform readers. The sender has the power to entice his/her many readers to follow what they “preaching” (in a sense). Once the idea has gotten out to readers, they in turn tell others about what they have read and thus lead back to the power the author of the article has gained. Incorrect information has power as well when applied to this scenario.

The last argument that the Internet is a democratic technology is more power to the less powerful argument. This means that the internet gives more power to the less powerful people. In a sense, it takes power away from the most powerful people. The Internet has allowed people of all walks of life to find an audience to listen to their cause. This allows the cause to gain momentum as it reaches more readers.

The author, Deborah G. Johnson is reluctant to accept the previous three arguments because there are some other behavior patterns facilitated by the Internet not mentioned in the three arguments that are not non-democratic or neutral to democracy.

In summary, the Internet ignites all kinds of behavior patterns from democratic to non-democratic. No one kind of behavior can be solely responsible for the make up of the Internet. The beauty of the Internet is the vast information and opinions that are available to us. Which in turn lets us makes decisions on our own recognizance.

WORKS CITED

Johnson, Deborah G. Computer Ethics (3rd Edition). Prentice Hall 2001

This article is original content written by Tanya L. See. Reproduction of this content maybe used on any website as long as it's copied in it's entirety and credit is given to Tanya L. See and a link to her website, www.tanyasee.com, is included.