Published on

Published in: News & Politics
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide


  1. 1. February 22, 2012
  2. 2. Key Claims about Impact of theInternet on Political Parties Party Competition (possible lower cost to start a new party) Power Diffusion (increased grassroots control over candidates) Institutional Adaptation (parties adapt to the Internet by using it to buttress their advantages, party competition will not increase)
  3. 3. The Howard Dean Campaign 2003-2004 Campaign Joe Trippi in charge of Internet strategy Early alliance with meetup.com Early support from the Daily Kos Dean won in New Hampshire but ultimately lost to Kerry
  4. 4. The 2008 Obama Campaign Extensive use of the Internet to solicit small campaign contributions and to build a network of campaign workers/volunteers Extensive use of YouTube to spread David Plouffe awareness of the campaign by repurposing campaign ads More limited use of interactivity to video gather ideas from supporters and to vet ideas from campaign headquarters
  5. 5. The 2008 Presidential Election What the Pew Internet and American Life Project has to say about it (report).  More got politic al info from the Internet, espec. online political videos  Increased use of social networking sites (MySpace and Facebook)  Increase in online contributors from 2 percent in 2004 to 6 percent in 2008  Some self-reports of voter empowerment but also of worries about extremism and misinformation
  6. 6. Discussion Points (Chadwick, ch. 7) Has the early potential of the Internet been realized in the area of election campaigning? Why has the United States witnessed greater levels of online campaigning than the United Kingdom? Assess the long-term significance of the Dean campaign of 2003-2004. Is online interaction too risky for politicians? Have parties successfully adapted to the Internet? Evaluate the claim that the Internet will combat voter apathy.
  7. 7. Defining e-Government “…e-government initiatives usually involve several types of electronic and information systems, including database, networking, discussion support, multimedia, automation, tracking and tracing, and personal identification technologies.” Can be used at all levels of government from local to national. Goals for use are diverse. May be useful to distinguish among G2G, G2B, and G2C communications.
  8. 8. Historical Developments in US U.S. National Performance Review (1993 supervised by VP Al Gore) Creation of government portal, Firstgov (now called USA.gov) Clinton memorandum to accelerate e-government Government Paperwork Elimination Act of 1998 E-Government Act of 2002 More history of initiatives can be found on the OMB Office of E-Government and Information Technology web site
  9. 9. Work of Darrell West IU Political Science PhD Until recently he taught at Brown University Currently head of Governance Studies at the Brookings Institution Check out his web site, Inside Politics, for data on e- government at the state and federal government levels and also for international comparisons
  10. 10. Work of Stuart Shulman Univ. of Oregon PhD Taught at Univ. of Pittsburgh, 1999-2008 Currently at U. Mass, Amherst Main research: federal agency rule-making Founder of the Journal of Information Technology and Politics
  11. 11. Discussion Points (Chadwick, ch. 8) What are the policy origins of e-government? Is e-government about better government, better democracy, or both? How is e-government different from previous government computerization initiatives? Doe e-government change power relations with public bureaucracies? Does e-government redistribute power within the political system?