Minnesota E-Democracy (www.e-democracy.org) is a non-partisan, independent organisation established in 1994 that aims to enable internet-based dialogue and debate between citizens and groups in Minnesota.242 It claims that its MN-POLITICS is ‘the world's largest state-level political e-mail discussion and announcement network.’243 Certainly Minnesota E-Democracy has become an internationally- renowned democratic innovation influencing the development of projects across the world.
MN-POLITICS has three separate email lists:
• announcements
• state political discussions
• national and world affairs discussions.
MN-POLITICS discussion forums are less anarchic than many other internet-based forums since they are (lightly) moderated by a list manager who ensures that basic rules and guidelines of engagement are followed by users.244
There is no data on the demographic characteristics of users, although recent research indicates that a significant proportion of users can be classified as ‘activists’ and have a high degree of interest in politics. A small, but significant proportion work in public administration or are journalists. Like many e-democracy initiatives, Minnesota E-Democracy appears to attract those already interested in political activities.
Although difficult to assess, there appears to be evidence that Minnesota E- Democracy has, at times, played an agenda-setting role – for example, the press has covered online debates. There is also anecdotal evidence that debates have had an effect on local political decisions.
In a recent survey (the representativeness of which is unclear), users state that Minnesota E-Democracy ‘is a good forum to spot political undercurrents not appearing in other media’ and that it provides ‘quicker responses and interactions among political actors’. There is a recognition that the discussion forums provide ‘much more equal access for all viewpoints and opinions than traditional media’ – aside from a few strict rules set by moderators, Minnesota E-Democracy has no editorial filters. Participants report that Minnesota E-Democracy has increased their political interest and knowledge, as well as their understanding and respect of the viewpoints and opinions of other citizens.245 Although there is a tendency to over- state effects in surveys, there appears to be evidence that Minnesota E-Democracy plays an important role in civic life and engagement in the state.
7.2.5. BBC iCan
BBC iCan (www.bbc.co.uk/dna/ican) is an interesting development of the Minnesota E-Democracy model: in the wake of falling voter turnout and other signs of
disaffection with politics, the BBC decided to explore the ways of using new technology to connect citizens to each other’.246 iCan was launched in October 2003.
The iCan site ‘aims to help people take first steps in addressing issues which concern them’.247 iCan offers a number of facilities, including:
• information and advice on hundreds of social and political issues, including who to contact for help;
• details of what’s going on in particular geographical areas – users are able to type their postcode on the homepage;
• a local noticeboard where users can post a notice on issues that are of concern or advertise local events;
• support for starting a campaign online with other iCan users;
• articles by activists sharing their experience and expertise.
Thus iCan has both a local focus as well as opportunities to engage on national (or supra-national) issues. Sian Kevill who jointly heads the project recognises that the way people engage with politics has changed: ‘People don’t approach politics through party allegiances any more […] they approach it through an issue, and this site makes it easier for people to connect into politics through an issue.’248
7.2.6. HeadsUp
HeadsUp (www.headsup.org.uk) was formally launched by the Hansard Society in June 2003 as an internet resource for raising political literacy and participation amongst young people under the age of 18 and providing a vehicle for consultation with a hard-to-reach group. The central feature of HeadsUp is a moderated online forum where young people deliberate on topical political issues that relate to the parliamentary and democratic process. There is a range of background information to support the online discussions. Access to the website is unrestricted, apart from the online forum which requires pre-registration (by teachers) to ensure security. The site has been designed not only to promote debate amongst young people, but also to assist teachers with citizenship education and for MPs to consult with young people.
Currently 248 schools and 1,700 students are registered to use HeadsUp. Following an evaluation of the first few months of usage, the site has been revamped in line with suggestions from students, teachers and parliamentarians. The site is highly attractive and user-friendly. HeadsUp has run a series of debates on topical issues, including the children’s commissioner, politics in the media, UK in the EU, asylum, reduction in voting age, pupil participation in schools and whether MPs are out of touch.249 An early evaluation by the Electoral Commission found that there was support for the project from teachers, students and parliamentarians.250 However, until recently the verbal support from parliamentarians had not turned into action – very rarely did any MPs post comments on the site. However in the recent debate on the children’s commissioner, Hilton Dawson, MP for Lancaster and Wyre, became heavily involved in the debate, often posting questions and comments two or three
times a day. HeadsUp was quoted on the floor of the House and in committee sessions.
There is a wide range of youth-orientated websites that promote political engagement – see for example, the report and virtual tour of US sites Youth as E- Citizens: Engaging the Digital Generation251 and the Demos report Logged Off? How ICT Can Connect Young People and Politics.252 However, HeadsUp differs from most youth-orientated sites – it not only provides political information and an online discussion forum, but also provides a facility for engaging with decision-makers, in this case MPs. As the Demos report stated:
ICTs can enable young people to engage with adults on more equal terms and reduce some of the inequalities of power, self expression and access that currently hinder their public involvement. […] the anonymity of the internet can encourage young people to express politically sensitive or contentious issues that might not be brought out in face-to-face situations. It can also neutralise some of the advantages associated with age, race, faith, gender, ability and background. Anonymity can help to build confidence and empowerment.253
There is, however, a digital divide – at least in terms of ownership and use – across socio-economic groups. ‘Over 65 per cent of middle-class children have access to a personal computer in the home, compared with just 40 per cent of working-class children. Some 14 per cent of middle-class children can go online at home, compared with a mere 2 per cent of their working-class counterparts.’254 A limited amount of facilities do exist that expand access – for example the Interchill cyber drop-in centre in Liverpool.255 However differentiated access remains a problem.