First of all digital media is a really good way to communicate with the youngest people, it helps exchanges between a politician and the outside world for example Donald Trump used to use Twitter to communicate with his audience. Moreover in today's society most people have access to screen such as their phone or their computer, so it's easy for them to see an information given by the president.
However the information given by the president is about his opinion on society, and it can be a form of propaganda or even a form of discrimination against a particular part of society. The problem with digital media is that young people that have access to digital media can be influenced easily because they don't have the ability to make up their mind or their own opinion. That's why you need to be able to have a critical thinking about what you see on the internet or digital media, so that you have the ability to distinguish between real and fake news, good and harmful contents. Thus you need to know the real definition of democracy before you see the opinion of one particular politician.
First, digital media is a very good way to communicate and exchange with young people and it is a way to facilitate exchanges between a politician and the outside world, for example some politicians use Instagram or Twitter to communicate with their audience. After having been invested with democratic promises, digital technologies are today accused of being the vector of infox and of making the bed of populism. So present in the public debate, this pendulum swing is simplistic and naive. It unifies the digital and its practices in a homogeneous whole and is constantly guilty of technological determinism. The great digital transition that we are experiencing is so massive, so generalized and so profound that we must learn to get rid of this reductionism. In a way, this is the task of digital social sciences. The media and politics are today being shaken up by a set of transformations in which the new opportunities for publication and exchange offered by digital play an indisputable role. But understanding these effects must focus on the variety and complexity of the appropriations of the network by political actors, the media and citizens.
Hi, Digital media such as twitter, facebook, instagram or even tiktok were now increasingly being used by politicians to reach citizens. It is a mode of communication that occupies a large public space around the world and which is focused particularly on the youngest, represented by Generation Z and Millennials. Moreover, messages are short and easily understood by as many people as possible. But these messages are not impartial and convey a unique way of thinking. Thus, the emergence of digital media is unavoidable but we must remain vigilant against the independence of the media regarding the politicians. It can be a danger for democracy in case of uncritical attitude.
Hello, First of all, I think that nowadays digital media have an important impact on almost all of us. I would even say that we can't be an active citizen without being connected on digital media. On the one hand, I believe that it is a good way to be aware almost instantly. But, on the other hand, it is the best way to spread fake news. Digital media can allow members of the government to get closer to younger citizens and thus gain their trust. Indeed, unlike newspapers, the news published on social media are often not verified and the intended audience is frequently naive. Democracy is a form of government in which sovereignty belongs to citizens. At first sight, I would say that digital media could be a vector for democracy because, contrary to the long presidential speeches, we can react to the posts made by the President or other politicians. But, Democracy also means that all citizens must be equal. So everyone should have the same chance to see or react to these posts. Yet, that is not the case and, by being really active on social media, politicians don't treat all citizens the same. To conclude, I think that, even if digital media are a really good way to bring politicians closer to the people, it disadvantages those who don't have access to it. Therefore, I think that they should use it sometimes and the true informations that they post should be related in some newspapers in order to give the same access to everyone.
First of all, digital media is a platform where people all over the world can share, talk and meet. This technology is also used to share political information and opinions. In fact, the politician used instagram, Twitter or other digital media to inform the population. That is why it can be see as a good way to communicate. However I see many drawbacks : for instance it excludes people which don't have access to it. Then politicians can publish whatever they want and say a lot a thing that aren't always true to influence people. Digital media can be seen as the new mean of propaganda. If we take the exemple of Donald Trump in the United states,, his digital media allows him to spread fake news and he divides people with extremist ideas. In fact, social networks widen the gap between Democrat and Republican: algorithms lock people into their conception of things so that they have no other idea that can oppose them. They don't have different sources and are closed-minded. A study has shown that the gap between these two parties has never been so wide since the elections. To conclude, digital technology can be a vector of democracy if it is well used and everyone has a critical mind. On the contrary, they can be a means of propaganda and influence people, especially the youngest.
Carla SAPPIA Today, the use of social networks is no longer about innovation or originality. And these digital spaces have begun to influence our lives in many ways. Twitter, Facebook and other networks are not just social networking sites: we read the news, talk about politics, create events, campaign and spend a significant amount of our time there. The most popular users or accounts are even given the title of "influencer", as they have a real potential to influence the opinions and actions of their followers.
More than 3 billion people, approximately 40% of the world's population, use one or more social networks to communicate, be entertained and for information. Social networks are used to share , know, amplify, multiply information. Moreover, democracy is based on the free flow of information and the ability of a country's citizens to be heard. Social medias provide an access to public space, and therefore, in theory, to democratic debate. Rather, they are like a loudspeaker that allows everyone to speak to their ideological community, to broadcast announcements, to inform of a meeting for example. Or they can influence public opinion, and even the outcome of an election like Donald Trump did. But personal interests can manipulate social media by spreading “fake news” or misinforming. It can be dangerous too because there are hacking of computer systems, online harassment and dissemination of hate messages. Social medias like Twitter literally determines who is allowed to speak,it can suspend that right from anyone at any time and for any reasons. That’s why social medias are not just a vector for democraty but also they weakened it.
Hello. First of all, I think that nowadays, social medias are very important because they are at the center of everything. The new generation that we are communicates thanks to them, and above all, it is a way to express ourselves, when we don't have the opportininity in our daily life. And many politicians have understood this. Social networks allow politicians as well as the president, to talk to their population in a more direct way, without having to go through the media, which can distort their words. However, some people can use it to spread fake news. So there is still a negative side to social networks. Moreover, addressing the population through social networks is not really democratic, because not everyone is on Twitter or Facebook, and it would leave some people aside. To conclude, I think that the way politicians use social networks nowadays is more a kind of manipulation. Politicians know that young people are on the net, and many people use it to manipulate their young minds with their ideas.
Nowadays, it's hard to imagine a society without digital media. It has played a major role in our lives and has influenced the way we're thinking. It is a big source of information and most of all, digital media is a platform where anyone can express their thoughts and opinion on a certain subject.
There's is a risk of getting some information that can be fake. Consequently, any sort of group of people can share the same opinion as to the person that wrote this information because they believed him and followed him. And in a question of democracy, many people like this can make the wrong decisions. But from a positive point of view, we can admit that digital media, helped to reach a lot of new perspectives and analyze others' opinions which helps to make your own decision. It is nice that our community has an opportunity to express our thoughts which can even influence and change our lives in a positive way.
So, many individuals and mostly young people need to be more careful and prudent with the information they're acknowledging, otherwise, they can be manipulated by the propaganda, that is why we should be more consciously minded.
Democracy is a situation in which everyone is treated equally and has equal rights. Therefore, as digital media happens to enable each to tell their minds to the world, it seems to be a vector for democracy. Nonetheless, the accuracy of information happens to be an issue. Can we trust digital media; is it a vector for democracy? In fact, everyone can post content on digital media. Information is accessible to every user. At first sight, it appears to be a vector for democracy since it grants every people the right to express themselves and get informed. However, the information is not trustworthy as the sources are not always verified, and even verified people can diffuse false information-Donald J. Trump, the former US president, for instance- thus the good sides of digital media (everyone can post) happens to have serious drawbacks. Although the information is labeled verified, users may not know how the verification process works and may not assign to it a significant value. We should also keep in mind that what users see, what they are shown is decided by a few groups of people that hold digital media and that advertisement is just the visible part of the influence of money on social media. The conception of digital media as a vector for democracy then happened to be distorted since the information you have access to is controlled by a few groups (Influence of the GAFA that hold digital media).
Democracy is a situation in which everyone is treated equally and has equal rights. Therefore, as digital media happens to enable each to tell their minds to the world, it seems to be a vector for democracy. Nonetheless, the accuracy of information happens to be an issue. Can we trust digital media; is it a vector for democracy? In fact, everyone can post content on digital media. Information is accessible to every user. At first sight, it appears to be a vector for democracy since it grants everyone the right to express themselves and get informed. However, the information is not trustworthy as the sources are not always verified, and even verified people can diffuse false information-Donald J. Trump, the former US president, for instance- thus the good sides of digital media (everyone can post) happens to have serious drawbacks. Although the information is labeled verified, users may not know how the verification process works and may not assign to it a significant value. We should also keep in mind that what users see, what they are shown is decided by a few groups of people that hold digital media and that advertisement is just the visible part of the influence of money on social media. The conception of digital media as a vector for democracy then happened to be distorted since the information you have access to is controlled by a few groups (Influence of the GAFA that hold digital media).
Hello, There are many answers to this question and many pros and cons of digital media.
First of all, digital media are a way to know really quickly about the news, but today (and for most of us we are aware of it) lot of fake news are posted in order to create buzz. Nowadays, a new type of media is emerging : social media, and they are even more dangerous. Because some politicians campaign on tik tok. Indeed, the minister of transports is becoming very famous on this application, and many politicians joined him in order to be known by the very young generation. For the democracy, I really believe it is a problem for 2 important reasons. In practice, it is forbidden for children under 13 to use it, and even to subscribe to it. But in reality, it isn’t an obstacle, no one will check if you are the right age on this application. Beyond this, let’s imagine we are all over 13 years old. Do you honestly think that a 14 years old person is able to have a « normal » opinion after seeing videos of politicians on tik tok where they seem to have the best ideas possible. In my opinion, I don’t think so because you aren’t mature enough. Moreover, evolving with this influence will inevitably interfere with your future beliefs in politicians, even at 18. There are many many teenagers that believe that politicians are so cool whereas they are not even talking about real politics but trying to sympathize with future voters, and at our young age many aren’t aware of this. They are manipulating us, that’s it. And here we are, politicians are at the head of our democracy, that’s why it is dangerous. The other major problem is that false ideas are conveyed (not specifically by ministers, presidential candidates, but) by people who radicalize others who are way too young to understand what they are talking about. Or who bully others, make fun of them, normalize fake ideas, etc… As a result, they think that democracy isn’t a good idea, that someone should take control of others. Maybe I’m going too far but we are the first generation to « experience » this, and we should be informed about that. On a nutshell social media are used by the youth, that’s why it is dangerous. About the other media like newspapers, they don’t have this problem because young people don’t read them anymore. Besides, it doesn’t mean they are telling the truth. Most of them take a part in politics : either right-wing ideology or left-wing ideology (or center ideology). Regarding TV channels, they are clearly choosing a political party but won’t admit it; yes there are neutral channels but much less. All of this proves that it is difficult to trust digital media.
Nevertheless, digital medias denounce problems in the world or individual problem in order to help the concerned person (or people), that is a good side of them. For instance, some organizations are fighting against (and sharing it on social medias) the oppression of non-democratic governments. Besides, politicians explain real things about their campaigns on digital media. (And if we hadn’t had television during covid period, specifically at the beginning of it, we would have had lots of troubles communicating with the government and knowing more about what we should do).
In conclusion, saying that we should or shouldn’t trust digital media is a difficult question because there are many advantages and drawbacks. However, it is sure that they are a vector for democracy but we must weigh in the balance that it is also a good way to defend it.
Correction : -many pros and cons to* digital media -digital media are a way to hear* the news faster* -no one will check if you are of* the right age -There are many many teenagers who* believe that politicians -that believe that politicians are very* cool -In* a nutshell -that is a good side to* them -especially* at the beginning of it
First of all digital media is a really good way to communicate with the youngest people, it helps exchanges between a politician and the outside world for example Donald Trump used to use Twitter to communicate with his audience. Moreover in today's society most people have access to screen such as their phone or their computer, so it's easy for them to see an information given by the president.
ReplyDeleteHowever the information given by the president is about his opinion on society, and it can be a form of propaganda or even a form of discrimination against a particular part of society. The problem with digital media is that young people that have access to digital media can be influenced easily because they don't have the ability to make up their mind or their own opinion. That's why you need to be able to have a critical thinking about what you see on the internet or digital media, so that you have the ability to distinguish between real and fake news, good and harmful contents. Thus you need to know the real definition of democracy before you see the opinion of one particular politician.
First, digital media is a very good way to communicate and exchange with young people and it is a way to facilitate exchanges between a politician and the outside world, for example some politicians use Instagram or Twitter to communicate with their audience.
ReplyDeleteAfter having been invested with democratic promises, digital technologies are today accused of being the vector of infox and of making the bed of populism. So present in the public debate, this pendulum swing is simplistic and naive.
It unifies the digital and its practices in a homogeneous whole and is constantly guilty of technological determinism. The great digital transition that we are experiencing is so massive, so generalized and so profound that we must learn to get rid of this reductionism. In a way, this is the task of digital social sciences. The media and politics are today being shaken up by a set of transformations in which the new opportunities for publication and exchange offered by digital play an indisputable role. But understanding these effects must focus on the variety and complexity of the appropriations of the network by political actors, the media and citizens.
Narjess RIZKI 104
(Pauline Creisson)
ReplyDeleteHi,
Digital media such as twitter, facebook, instagram or even tiktok were now increasingly being used by politicians to reach citizens. It is a mode of communication that occupies a large public space around the world and which is focused particularly on the youngest, represented by Generation Z and Millennials.
Moreover, messages are short and easily understood by as many people as possible. But these messages are not impartial and convey a unique way of thinking.
Thus, the emergence of digital media is unavoidable but we must remain vigilant against the independence of the media regarding the politicians. It can be a danger for democracy in case of uncritical attitude.
Hello,
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I think that nowadays digital media have an important impact on almost all of us. I would even say that we can't be an active citizen without being connected on digital media. On the one hand, I believe that it is a good way to be aware almost instantly. But, on the other hand, it is the best way to spread fake news.
Digital media can allow members of the government to get closer to younger citizens and thus gain their trust. Indeed, unlike newspapers, the news published on social media are often not verified and the intended audience is frequently naive. Democracy is a form of government in which sovereignty belongs to citizens. At first sight, I would say that digital media could be a vector for democracy because, contrary to the long presidential speeches, we can react to the posts made by the President or other politicians. But, Democracy also means that all citizens must be equal. So everyone should have the same chance to see or react to these posts. Yet, that is not the case and, by being really active on social media, politicians don't treat all citizens the same.
To conclude, I think that, even if digital media are a really good way to bring politicians closer to the people, it disadvantages those who don't have access to it. Therefore, I think that they should use it sometimes and the true informations that they post should be related in some newspapers in order to give the same access to everyone.
Sorry, I made a mistake, I should have said "to be informed instantly".
DeleteFirst of all, digital media is a platform where people all over the world can share, talk and meet.
ReplyDeleteThis technology is also used to share political information and opinions. In fact, the politician used instagram, Twitter or other digital media to inform the population. That is why it can be see as a good way to communicate. However I see many drawbacks : for instance it excludes people which don't have access to it. Then politicians can publish whatever they want and say a lot a thing that aren't always true to influence people. Digital media can be seen as the new mean of propaganda. If we take the exemple of Donald Trump in the United states,, his digital media allows him to spread fake news and he divides people with extremist ideas. In fact, social networks widen the gap between Democrat and Republican: algorithms lock people into their conception of things so that they have no other idea that can oppose them. They don't have different sources and are closed-minded. A study has shown that the gap between these two parties has never been so wide since the elections.
To conclude, digital technology can be a vector of democracy if it is well used and everyone has a critical mind. On the contrary, they can be a means of propaganda and influence people, especially the youngest.
Can share ideas * / politicians/ can be seen/ people who / things/ example
DeleteCarla SAPPIA
ReplyDeleteToday, the use of social networks is no longer about innovation or originality. And these
digital spaces have begun to influence our lives in many ways. Twitter, Facebook and
other networks are not just social networking sites: we read the news, talk about politics,
create events, campaign and spend a significant amount of our time there. The most
popular users or accounts are even given the title of "influencer", as they have a real
potential to influence the opinions and actions of their followers.
More than 3 billion people, approximately 40% of the world's population, use one or more social networks to communicate, be entertained and for information.
ReplyDeleteSocial networks are used to share , know, amplify, multiply information.
Moreover, democracy is based on the free flow of information and the ability of a country's citizens to be heard. Social medias provide an access to public space, and therefore, in theory, to democratic debate. Rather, they are like a loudspeaker that allows everyone to speak to their ideological community, to broadcast announcements, to inform of a meeting for example. Or they can influence public opinion, and even the outcome of an election like Donald Trump did. But personal interests can manipulate social media by spreading “fake news” or misinforming. It can be dangerous too because there are hacking of computer systems, online harassment and dissemination of hate messages. Social medias like Twitter literally determines who is allowed to speak,it can suspend that right from anyone at any time and for any reasons. That’s why social medias are not just a vector for democraty but also they weakened it.
Hello.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, I think that nowadays, social medias are very important because they are at the center of everything. The new generation that we are communicates thanks to them, and above all, it is a way to express ourselves, when we don't have the opportininity in our daily life. And many politicians have understood this. Social networks allow politicians as well as the president, to talk to their population in a more direct way, without having to go through the media, which can distort their words. However, some people can use it to spread fake news. So there is still a negative side to social networks. Moreover, addressing the population through social networks is not really democratic, because not everyone is on Twitter or Facebook, and it would leave some people aside. To conclude, I think that the way politicians use social networks nowadays is more a kind of manipulation. Politicians know that young people are on the net, and many people use it to manipulate their young minds with their ideas.
Sorry, I made some mistakes :
Delete- we communicates
- daily lives
Nowadays, it's hard to imagine a society without digital media. It has played a major role in our lives and has influenced the way we're thinking. It is a big source of information and most of all, digital media is a platform where anyone can express their thoughts and opinion on a certain subject.
ReplyDeleteThere's is a risk of getting some information that can be fake. Consequently, any sort of group of people can share the same opinion as to the person that wrote this information because they believed him and followed him. And in a question of democracy, many people like this can make the wrong decisions. But from a positive point of view, we can admit that digital media, helped to reach a lot of new perspectives and analyze others' opinions which helps to make your own decision. It is nice that our community has an opportunity to express our thoughts which can even influence and change our lives in a positive way.
So, many individuals and mostly young people need to be more careful and prudent with the information they're acknowledging, otherwise, they can be manipulated by the propaganda, that is why we should be more consciously minded.
Hi.
ReplyDeleteDemocracy is a situation in which everyone is treated equally and has equal rights. Therefore, as digital media happens to enable each to tell their minds to the world, it seems to be a vector for democracy. Nonetheless, the accuracy of information happens to be an issue. Can we trust digital media; is it a vector for democracy?
In fact, everyone can post content on digital media. Information is accessible to every user. At first sight, it appears to be a vector for democracy since it grants every people the right to express themselves and get informed.
However, the information is not trustworthy as the sources are not always verified, and even verified people can diffuse false information-Donald J. Trump, the former US president, for instance- thus the good sides of digital media (everyone can post) happens to have serious drawbacks. Although the information is labeled verified, users may not know how the verification process works and may not assign to it a significant value. We should also keep in mind that what users see, what they are shown is decided by a few groups of people that hold digital media and that advertisement is just the visible part of the influence of money on social media.
The conception of digital media as a vector for democracy then happened to be distorted since the information you have access to is controlled by a few groups (Influence of the GAFA that hold digital media).
Florian Crahès, T2.
Correction:
DeleteEvery=singular => everyone
Hi.
Democracy is a situation in which everyone is treated equally and has equal rights. Therefore, as digital media happens to enable each to tell their minds to the world, it seems to be a vector for democracy. Nonetheless, the accuracy of information happens to be an issue. Can we trust digital media; is it a vector for democracy?
In fact, everyone can post content on digital media. Information is accessible to every user. At first sight, it appears to be a vector for democracy since it grants everyone the right to express themselves and get informed.
However, the information is not trustworthy as the sources are not always verified, and even verified people can diffuse false information-Donald J. Trump, the former US president, for instance- thus the good sides of digital media (everyone can post) happens to have serious drawbacks. Although the information is labeled verified, users may not know how the verification process works and may not assign to it a significant value. We should also keep in mind that what users see, what they are shown is decided by a few groups of people that hold digital media and that advertisement is just the visible part of the influence of money on social media.
The conception of digital media as a vector for democracy then happened to be distorted since the information you have access to is controlled by a few groups (Influence of the GAFA that hold digital media).
Florian Crahès, T2
Hello,
ReplyDeleteThere are many answers to this question and many pros and cons of digital media.
First of all, digital media are a way to know really quickly about the news, but today (and for most of us we are aware of it) lot of fake news are posted in order to create buzz.
Nowadays, a new type of media is emerging : social media, and they are even more dangerous. Because some politicians campaign on tik tok.
Indeed, the minister of transports is becoming very famous on this application, and many politicians joined him in order to be known by the very young generation.
For the democracy, I really believe it is a problem for 2 important reasons.
In practice, it is forbidden for children under 13 to use it, and even to subscribe to it. But in reality, it isn’t an obstacle, no one will check if you are the right age on this application.
Beyond this, let’s imagine we are all over 13 years old. Do you honestly think that a 14 years old person is able to have a « normal » opinion after seeing videos of politicians on tik tok where they seem to have the best ideas possible. In my opinion, I don’t think so because you aren’t mature enough. Moreover, evolving with this influence will inevitably interfere with your future beliefs in politicians, even at 18.
There are many many teenagers that believe that politicians are so cool whereas they are not even talking about real politics but trying to sympathize with future voters, and at our young age many aren’t aware of this. They are manipulating us, that’s it. And here we are, politicians are at the head of our democracy, that’s why it is dangerous.
The other major problem is that false ideas are conveyed (not specifically by ministers, presidential candidates, but) by people who radicalize others who are way too young to understand what they are talking about. Or who bully others, make fun of them, normalize fake ideas, etc… As a result, they think that democracy isn’t a good idea, that someone should take control of others. Maybe I’m going too far but we are the first generation to « experience » this, and we should be informed about that.
On a nutshell social media are used by the youth, that’s why it is dangerous.
About the other media like newspapers, they don’t have this problem because young people don’t read them anymore. Besides, it doesn’t mean they are telling the truth. Most of them take a part in politics : either right-wing ideology or left-wing ideology (or center ideology).
Regarding TV channels, they are clearly choosing a political party but won’t admit it; yes there are neutral channels but much less.
All of this proves that it is difficult to trust digital media.
Nevertheless, digital medias denounce problems in the world or individual problem in order to help the concerned person (or people), that is a good side of them. For instance, some organizations are fighting against (and sharing it on social medias) the oppression of non-democratic governments.
Besides, politicians explain real things about their campaigns on digital media. (And if we hadn’t had television during covid period, specifically at the beginning of it, we would have had lots of troubles communicating with the government and knowing more about what we should do).
In conclusion, saying that we should or shouldn’t trust digital media is a difficult question because there are many advantages and drawbacks.
However, it is sure that they are a vector for democracy but we must weigh in the balance that it is also a good way to defend it.
Charlier Jade, 104
Correction :
Delete-many pros and cons to* digital media
-digital media are a way to hear* the news faster*
-no one will check if you are of* the right age
-There are many many teenagers who* believe that politicians
-that believe that politicians are very* cool
-In* a nutshell
-that is a good side to* them
-especially* at the beginning of it