What has this to do digitization with democracy? A hell of a lot! And the casual word fits. Like the upper Green, Robert Habeck. The self-damned, and of social networks, is excluded. Though not true, his party will continue to instagrammen about him, twittering, face booken,. Only he personally, not more.
a Hell of a lot to do this Form of digital networking, but also with what is to make of democracy: participation. And although the citizen in decision-making processes. Properly understood, transparency is one of them. So one could infer as well as Habeck conclusion: if you are interested in community, should not exclude the use of mass media.
This attitude, we call it open, now requires but several. Especially that everyone, not least of all, any politician, is clear about how he wants to use the social media. To do PR, content on the channels to distribute and break up? Or they are supposed to be dialogue, and even discourse instrument? Depending on the decision type, as the channel is filled.
not Many have, as a rule, the time, a very long piece in the social networks. Many politicians, businesses, and organizations respond to this challenge by claiming that you hire professionals, your Social Media support Accounts. It will be, if you follow the Numbers, in the Parliament area. The support is then often up to the Personal. So it can happen, by the way, that the Account of Christian Lindner to the Amusement of the network, Christian Lindner congratulated the municipality and then to the birthday.
Nevertheless, this deal is triple neither to history nor to despise. We come here to a really important point: Who wants to true democratic practice has to offer in today's time "a valid response points in the network". Says, is representative of the many, the policy Advisor Mathias Richel. "The constituency office and the garden fence have not lost their importance, but social networks are placed in an equivalent Position." Right: virtually, there is neighbourhood care.
let's Take Twitter, for 96 percent of the people of this country, it is as a Medium, not Central. Want to say: you don't tweet. But you know the political intentions of the multipliers are a target audience on Twitter. Social networks provide information. They are already diverse. The number of Followers is also a, because it says something about how someone arrives with his positions. But the posts on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram offer more than that – they show what messages politicians take important.More about
Habeck Social-Media-exit "First, I have blown up the bridges," to refrain from
that is, the existing, unused potential still to have to over the Internet appeal, on Blogs, or by Teams of moderated Accounts. As with the Green Robert Habeck. Therefore, it remains an almost intellectual exercise, with a view to professionalising the use of Social Media and to control themselves in their dealings. And to initiate debates, if they are (intentionally I hope). That policy needs to be brought in to clear, catchy terms, is a teaching from the previous century. A damn important one.