REPRESENTATION AS INTERACTIVE COMMUNICATION

Abstract

Considering the recent interest in more interactive practices in political representation, this article argues that there is a need to understand the differentiated meanings and functions of this form of communication. The subject of political representation as interactive communication is addressed theoretically as well as empirically. A theoretical framework is presented identifying three strategic functions of interactive communication in political representation: (1) interactivity as accountability, (2) interactivity as inquiry, and (3) interactivity as connectivity. Also, empirical analyses are conducted among blogging politicians in Sweden. These analyses suggest that interactive communication among political representatives cannot be understood as either a radical change in terms of new interactive forms of representation breaking with earlier norms and ideals, or complete continuity. Instead, the argument is that representatives may adopt interactive communication strategically to fulfil different normative ideals of political representation.

Keywords:

• e-Democracy
• political representation
• Web 2.0
• computer-mediated-communication
• blogging

Notes

There are, of course, economical and status-oriented incentives for desiring to win electoral support, at least in national and EU-level politics. In this perspective, the job of political representative becomes the equivalent of any other job.

Promissory representation describes a relationship between the voter and elected, centered on the making and fulfillment of electoral promises. Anticipatory representation describes a relationship in which the representative focuses on satisfying the anticipated will of the electorate at the time of the next election. See Mansbridge (2003, pp. 516–520) and Rehfeld (2009).

A rare exception from this order in contemporary representative democracies occurs when representative institutions decide to issue a referendum direct impacting on policy. Even in the context of this exception, representatives have the power to decide to delegate their decision-making power directly to the public on a specific issue.

The respondents answered the following survey question:

If, when examining an important issue of principle in a political assembly a conflict emerges between a member's own opinion, the opinion of his/her party or the opinion of the voters, how should, in your opinion, a member of the assembly vote?

The answer choices presented were: (1) Vote in accordance with his/her personal view (Trustee), (2) Vote in accordance with his/her party (Party delegate), and (3) Vote in accordance with the perception of the voters (Delegate).