7. Democratic Deficit                                                                        <- Back to categories

Beyond the Soundbite: BBC Research into Public Disillusion with Politics 

Beyond the Soundbite is a February 2002 research paper commissioned by the BBC.

The 24 page document is in two parts: the first reports research findings by The Research Business International and the second sets out recommendations for the BBC.

The paper provides a good insight into the nature of the disconnection between the general public and the political process.

On-Line Deliberation: Possibilities of the Internet for Deliberative Democracy 

On-line Deliberation is an October 2002 academic paper given at the to Euricom Colloquium on Electronic Networks & Democratic Engagement by Tamara Witschge of the Amsterdam School of Communications Research, University of Amsterdam.

Abstract: "Advocates of deliberative democracy argue that a specific type of conversation is required for politics, one that involves difference and disagreement. But it is exactly this difference and disagreement that make people avoid deliberative politics. As empirical studies show, people seek like-minded to talk politics with, since this is less threatening and more enjoyable. In this paper I examine whether features of the Internet create an environment in which politics is less difficult and demanding, thereby increasing heterogeneity and equality within political discussions. Empirical studies show that this is not the case. The Internet does not seem to generate the diversity in voices and viewpoints in the way that was hoped. Anonymity does not liberate us of all the fears we had in encountering conflict. Nor does the absence of social cues lead to the discursive equality. However, I argue that it is too early to conclude that the Internet is not enhancing and cannot enhance democracy. Many gaps in the empirical research need to be bridged, before we can make any conclusions on the Internet’s potential."

Removing Conceptual Blinders: Under What Conditions does the 'Democratic Deficit' Affect Institutional Design Decisions 

This paper pursues two objectives, one theoretical the other empirical. First, by keeping separate two grand strands in the EU studies literature, one on the design and reform of EU institutions and the other on the EU’s ‘democratic deficit’, EU scholars are foreclosing the opportunity to address a hitherto unanswered question: When and under what conditions does the ‘democratic deficit’ – as it is perceived by political elites in the member states – carry institutional design implications? Does the ‘democratic deficit’ really matter to political elites, and if this is the case, how does it matter? Will it inform political elites’ preferences and choices for institutional design and change?

By conceptualising the ‘democratic deficit’ as a value of the independent variable, we are guided to ask when and under what conditions it informs decisions for institutional design and reform. This paper will develop a set of propositions linking political elites’ perceptions about a ‘democratic deficit’ and their institutional design preferences. Secondly, to test the plausibility of these propositions, they will be subjected to empirical scrutiny. The paper shows that the creation and empowerment of the European Parliament can be accounted for by applying the propositions elaborated in this paper. Hence, a question that has puzzled students of European integration since the inception of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) – why national governments have successively bestowed the European Parliament (EP) with powers (supervisory, budgetary, and legislative) – can only be answered by exploring the conditions under which the ‘democratic deficit’ – as perceived by political elites – will carry institutional design implications.

Perception of Partisan Bias seen as Growing  

Perceptions of Partisan Bias Seen as Growing is a circa 40 page survey of the "fragmented political news universe" associated with the US Presidential campaign, issued with a press release header by The Pew Research Center for the People and the Press in January 2003.

                                                                                                          <- Back to categories