Citizenship in the age of the Internet: a comparative analysis of Britain and Turkey

Abstract

The article links the literatures on citizenship studies and electronic democracy by analyzing the extent to which theories and practices of citizenship are being transformed in the age of the Internet. Distinguishing between the different citizenship traditions of liberal-individualism and civic-republicanism, we analyze the interplay between generic technological tools and the divergent historical legacies of citizenship in Turkey and Britain. Based on our analysis of governmental portals, main e-government applications, and censorship and surveillance practices, we argue that new information and communication technologies (ICTs) serve the states' interests by enabling increased surveillance capabilities, more efficient bureaucracy, better border controls and criminal investigations. In both countries, citizens benefit from electronic service-delivery applications primarily as consumers of public services, while their role as citizens are not particularly enhanced. Parallel to these convergence tendencies, we observe striking differences in the way electronic citizenship is practiced in these two countries, stemming from different traditions of citizenship as well as different levels of democracy consolidation. Despite some of the transformative power of the ICTs, their use is largely shaped by the existing understandings of citizenship in both countries.

Keywords::

• citizenship
• Internet
• government
• rights
• surveillance

Notes

^1. Data from Turkish Statistical Institute, http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id = 10880, and Office for National Statistics, http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/rdit2/internet-access—households-and-individuals/2012/stb-internet-access–households-and-individuals–2012.html [Accessed 19 November 2012].

^2. SECSIS is designed to ensure more reliable voter registration and reduce the cases of election fraud.

^3. International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?id = 223, and The Democratic Audit of the United Kingdom, http://democracy-uk-2012.democraticaudit.com/public-participation–confidence-in-elections [Accessed 19 November 2012].

^4.http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/

^5. The way in which these social media applications are used by the government or the citizens is out of the scope of this research.

^6. Ozgur Gundem (Free agenda), Ozgur Politika (Free Politics), and Firat Haber Ajansi (Firat News Agency) are examples of targeted websites by Turkish courts because of their political content.

^7. For example, Charles Darwin was censored in his 200th birth year, on a monthly popular science magazine published by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TUBITAK). An executive member of the council intervened at the last minute to remove Darwin from the magazine's cover, as well as a dossier on the theory of evolution. In March 2012, daily newspaper Ozgur Gundem was closed for a month by court decision.