INTERNETING THE CITIZENS- STRENTHENING POLITICAL COMMUNICATION

One of the prerequisites to have a successful ‘participatory democracy’ is the healthy political communication between the citizens and the politicians. Without the sound political communication democracy cannot function overtime. The rift will grow and politics will become an elitist’s sphere, only understood and cared by few elite individuals.

Our road to democracy has just begun and we are all in the learning process. Many democratic nations around the world are battling to bring politics close to people’s heart. Research by various scholars reveals that people shun politics because of politicians. Politicians make their presence felt only when the election is around and care less after it is over. Some blame commercialization of television stating that politics has become a show business. In our case, only time will tell of our politicians. But, we have the option to avoid and tread the path that other nations are trying their best.

Traditional forms of media including the television could the best way to bridge the perceived gap between the politicians and the citizens. But it fails when it comes to engaging the citizens. So, in recent years the unprecedented growth of new media technologies, especially the internet has shed a new light- that it will revive the atrophied democratic public sphere. One of the biggest advantages of internet over other forms of media is its two-way communication process. It has the capacity to engage citizens and promote ‘thoughtful deliberation’. By engage I mean being able to participate in a discussion, be it of political discussion or private or other community discussion.

I was surprised to see that none of our elected representatives (MPs) from the Druk Phunseum Tshogpa group has email address listed on their website, let alone mobile phone numbers. Does that mean that we cannot reach them? Or they think that it too personal an information to be shared among the public who elected them? We must not forget that websites and email now provide people with both a new way to communicate with representatives, as well as a way to discuss issues with fellow citizens, via forums and chat rooms.

According to Pew Research Center (2008) more than 42% of those, aged between18 to 29, regularly learn about the campaign and political news from the internet, the highest percentage for any news source. In January 2004, it was just 20%. We do not have our figures but it is beyond doubt that more Bhutanese go online everyday. Only few years back there weren’t many people chatting in Druknet after the office hours. Now we can see more people chatting even till late in the evening. This shows that more Bhutanese own computers and have internet connection at home. And there is, of course, a major chunk of our youth yearning to learn and explore more about this new medium.

Websites like Hi5 and Facebook are increasingly becoming a networking tool for many Bhutanese, both at home and abroad. Today it is just a social networking tool, tomorrow it will become an important tool for political communication as well. This trend is visible in many developed countries.

In fact, an online forum like Kuenselonline has always been a platform for citizens to raise thoughtful comments and criticisms on important public policy and decisions. One notable example could be the various online feedbacks on our very sacred document, the Constitution. It is very uncommon in a small society like ours to come across people speaking against the government policies or high ranking officials. Had it not been for the internet many people, I am sure, would not have voiced their criticisms on this very important and sacred document.

All our politicians, or rather parliamentarians should have website of their own, or at least a weblog. This way they can not only connect their constituency with the other constituencies but can also provide information and act as forums for public debates of contemporary social issues. The parliamentarians can receive feedbacks and comments on their policy and issues from the concerned voters, encouraging public contributions to important policy consultations. This way a meaningful dialogue can be created and hence bridge the gap between the two.

One very local example could be the weblog of Lekey Dorji, the PDP candidate of Bardo-Trong constituency. A simple weblog with pictures carries all the information about his constituency. It clearly spells out some of the priorities and issues of his constituency that need to be addressed. It can be a very good reference point for other ‘wannabe politicians and parliamentarians.’ Running a website or a weblog is not difficult anymore. And it is even available at absolutely no cost. Websites like wordpress.com, blogspot.com, and geocities.com offer free space to blog. We do see quite a number of Bhutanese blogging in recent times.

However, this exciting medium is not without drawbacks. And it is more prominent in the developing countries. One of the major drawbacks is the so called ‘digital divide’, the gap between haves and have-nots. Low literacy rate, lack of telephone connectivity, income levels are some of the major reasons among others. But that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t let ICT to play a greater role in political communication. We have always had a strong oral tradition. And now with mobile phones I am sure most people must be keeping track of what is happening back at the village almost on a regular basis.

If the DPT government believes that their landslide victory in the last election was largely influenced by urban voters, then they must also believe that these are the people who have access to internet. If the non-mentioning of contact addresses of their MPs was a deliberate move then I am afraid that they are just letting the gap grow bigger.

We have just begun and we have time, before our citizens find government and politics rather boring and think they have better things to do with their time.