Online deliberation

The term online deliberation describes the emerging field of practice and research related to the design, implementation and study of deliberative processes that rely on the use of electronic information and communications technologies (ICT). The term online deliberation describes the emerging field of practice and research related to the design, implementation and study of deliberative processes that rely on the use of electronic information and communications technologies (ICT). Online deliberation is a relatively new field. Online deliberation is very interdisciplinary, and includes practices such as online consultation, e-participation, e-government, Citizen-to-Citizen (C2C), online deliberative polling, crowdsourcing, online facilitation, online research communities, interactive e-learning, civic dialogue in Internet forums and online chat, and group decision making that utilizes collaborative software and other forms of computer-mediated communication. Work in all these endeavors is tied together by the challenge of using electronic media in a way that deepens thinking and improves mutual understanding. Open international conferences on online deliberation have been held at Carnegie Mellon University in 2003, Stanford University in 2005, and the University of California, Berkeley in 2008. The most recent conference was held at the University of Leeds, June 30 – July 2, 2010. Attendees of the 2005 conference voted to create an international society for online deliberation, but no formal organization has yet been established. Other events of interest have been sponsored by the Online Deliberative Democracy Consortium. Over the past few decades, scholars across research traditions and areas have commonly identified at least two aspects in their definitions of deliberation: (1) a form of communication characterized by 'the performance of a set of communicative behaviors that promote thorough group discussion'; and (2) the idea that individuals involved in this process of communication carefully weigh arguments and reasons for and against some propositions posed by others in the group. To be considered deliberative discussion, argue scholars, the communication and the involved interactants' behavior has to meet criteria established by the principles of political equality and egalitarian reciprocity. According to Habermas, deliberation is 'an interchange of rational–critical arguments among a group of individuals, triggered by a common or public problem, whose main focus or topic of discussion is to find a solution acceptable to all who have a stake in the issue'. Halpern and Gibbs define deliberation as 'a particular sort of discussion between at least two individuals in which (1) the form of communication emphasizes the use of logic and reasoning instead of power or coercion, (2) this reasoned engagement focuses on a social or political issue through which participants are able to identify solutions to a common problem, and (3) individuals are open to opinions and ideas expressed by others, and at the same time the communication between them is governed by rules of equality, symmetry and civility'. Stroud and colleagues noted that many definitions of deliberation 'share the basic idea that deliberation involves people exchanging views on a matter of public importance in a respectful manner, reasoning through their claims, and listening to the perspectives of others'. The advent of the Internet and subsequently Web 2.0-based applications and especially social media have fostered discursive participation and deliberation online through computer-mediated communication. Political deliberation is critical to societal consensus-building. Online deliberation can have positive implications for the democracy. Research has found that social media can enhance civic participation and democratic decision-making. First, online spaces allow for more equal and decentralized communication as numerous users from diverse backgrounds connect. Participants have equal opportunities to express opinions, raise questions, and exchange information. Secondly, online tools constitute a more favorable channel for users to engage in rational-critical debate than traditional synchronous channels because users are able to compose messages at their own pace and will. Thirdly, the written and asynchronous features of online deliberation enable more reflexive, rational and argumentative conversations. Researchers have questioned the utility of online deliberation as an extension of the public sphere, declining the idea that online deliberation is no less beneficial than face-to-face interaction. Computer-mediated discourse is deemed impersonal, and is found to encourage online incivility. Furthermore, users who participate in online discussions about politics are found to make comments only in groups that agree with their own views, indicating the possibility that online deliberation mainly promotes motivated reasoning and reinforces preexisting attitudes.