Chapter 7: Conclusions 7.1 Introduction

7.2 Reflective summaries

Guo, et al. (2007) argued that the Internet in China serves as an entertainment highway and a platform for interpersonal communication rather than being an information highway. Their surveys found that ‘the most fully used function of the Internet was still its entertainment function’ including games, listening to music, watching movies and TV etc. ( Guo, et al., 2007, p.36-38). They also found that reading news online was popular, but it was characterised by infotainment. Social and political issues did not enjoy as much popularity as ‘softer’ issues. Previous research reveals that the trend of political disengagement is not a unique phenomenon in China. In Western countries, the Internet was much less used for political purposes than for other purposes like entertainment, and non-political networking and chat (Dahlgren, 2005).

Key findings of this thesis point to a number of factors that explain why the use of the Internet for political purposes is minor. Censorship is widely blamed as the shackle on Internet freedom in mainland China. Its influence was found evident in this research. Censorship, however, was not found to be one of the major reasons. The research reveals that censorship had a direct impact on the participants’ generating, retweeting and discussing political content online. It was not the immediate reason that affected the participants’ choice of online consumption of political content and online political participation. However, censorship influences the participants to an extent greater than they realised through making ‘unwanted’ content unavailable such as politically sensitive content, social media posts with collective action potential, and information about what individuals should do about the problems exposed.

One of the major reasons for political disengagement that the research uncovered is related to the perception that politics seemed irrelevant to the participants. The participants did not perceive or consider that the social problems or issues they were exposed to online affected their life or development. The participants reported surveillance, social utility like networking and moral concerns rather than seeking a better natural and social environment for themselves or seeking to protect their own rights and interests as the major motivations for their consumption of political or social news online.

A revolutionary view of democratisation is another important theme that emerged from this research. The study found that the participants tended to see democratisation as a revolutionary overturn from the current system to a democratic government instead of an evolutionary process during which small changes accumulated to long-term substantial transition. Due to their revolutionary view of democratisation, they were inclined to believe that democratisation was impossible in China and thus they believed that their participation did not help. It is argued, therefore, that a revolutionary view of democratisation partly contributes to political disengagement online.

Studies of political efficacy (Caprara, et al., 2009) assert that individuals tend to be more active in both conventional and non-conventional forms of political participation when they believe that political action of its members, individually or collectively, does have, or can have, an impact upon the political process or the political system. It can be assumed that the opposite is also true. Low political efficacy hinders both conventional and non-conventional forms of political participation. Political efficacy constitutes two parts: internal political efficacy and external political efficacy. The author argues that individuals’ external political efficacy has an immediate impact on their internal political efficacy according to the findings of this research. Low external political efficacy results in low internal political efficacy. The research found low external political efficacy, low internal political efficacy, and little use of the Internet for political purpose to be common among the participants. The research also provides rich data to better understand the relationship between the three phenomena. The participants’ belief that the current political system is not subject to substantial political change led to their sense of their relative powerlessness in helping bring about a more democratic system. The participants neither believed that the Internet could democratise China, nor did they believe in their power to make a difference through Internet activity and discussion.

Results of this research also support the conclusion found in previous studies (Caprara, et al., 2009) that there is a positive correlation between individuals’ internal political efficacy and their political participation. More importantly, this research helps to better understand what contributes to low external political efficacy. It discovers a factor that explains why individuals believe that a political system is unamenable to change. It is argued that individuals are more likely to believe that a political system is unamenable to change when they take a revolutionary view of political change. As a result, individuals are less active in political participation. Figure 6 demonstrates how a revolutionary view of democratisation works to exert its influence upon an individual’s use of the Internet for political purposes.

Figure 6. How does a revolutionary view of democratisation exert its influence?

The fourth theme emerged from this research to explain the phenomenon of political disengagement online, is the relative lack of an organisational culture outside the party. Five out of six participants expressed a desire to participate, in one way or another, in volunteering activities or other community organisations. However, they actually participated in none. They reported that they were willing to do some volunteering work but they believed that there were few organised opportunities to do so. The lack of organisations and activities actively approaching university students and providing channels or ways that were easily accessible by the students to involve themselves in political participation was seen to be a major factor affecting their willingness to engage. As a result, only P06 reported participation in online petitions and none of the other participants reported any political participation online or offline. Their belief in lack of participation opportunities is confirmed by the author’s online search. Existing studies suggest that a lack of an organisational culture outside the party online results from the party-state’s strategic control of the Internet.

Based on the literature review of previous studies of the Internet’s influence in China and findings of the study, the author argues against a logic underlying many previous studies which emphasise the communicative and deliberative power of the Internet. The logic of such literature is that Internet technology necessarily promotes greater democratic deliberation because of the nature of the connected network and increasing democratic deliberation promotes democratisation. However, even in democratic societies, the Habermassian model of rational political discourse, either online or offline is far from being realised. The author argues that it is apparent political disengagement and ‘infotainment’ that actually highlight the democratising potential of the Internet in China. This study provides vivid and detailed empirical evidence to support this argument and to demonstrate how it works. The study finds that the Internet was the most important medium for the participants’ ability to access information and entertainment. The participants rely much more on the Internet than on traditional mass media. The participants’ greater exposure to the Internet than to the traditional media possesses the potential to break the Party and State’s hegemony over the distribution of information and ideologies through which a pro-authoritarian political culture is cultivated and secured.

In addition to the potential to distract the participants from the Party and State’s influence, the participants’ Internet use influences them through another mechanism, what Taubman (1998) called creating conditions of ideational pluralism. Providing access to multiple sources of ideas, images, and news is one of the prominent features of the Internet. The study finds that through the Internet participants confronted a great variety of information from a great number of communicators among whom the government was hardly one. Therefore, the author argues that participants’ exposure to ideational pluralism facilitated by the vast quantity of information and entertainment on the Internet has a positive influence on democratisation in China.

This works in three ways. Firstly, on the Internet, participants were exposed to alternative information and interpretations of canons and/or current events. Secondly, through Internet use, participants knew and understood better different social groups, foreign states, or the outside world in general through various channels and they developed confidence and skills to search for needed information and make their own judgement. Thirdly, Internet use allows for socioeconomic comparisons with life in other countries of different economic systems or political arrangements and life of ‘happier’ or ‘richer’ people; and thus generates discontent with the current system and longing for change. However, the research cannot conclude whether online entertainment and political disengagement will be a way to liberate or a way to control. The answer to that question is determined by many factors other than the Internet.

It can be asserted that the participants believed that their Internet usage had a positive effect on their views, attitudes and behaviours. Evidence for this assertion can be summarised as follows. Firstly it was believed by the participants that they became better-informed citizens through online exposure to a great variety of information from diverse communicators through different Internet applications and user-oriented information consumption. However, the findings of the participants’ news reading and information search and consumption habits demonstrate that the Internet’s potential to better the participants is far from being realised. It is constrained by the participants’ self-gatekeeping mechanism to create an echo chamber of their own design and by the party-state censorship strategy. Secondly, viewing, sharing, and deliberation of social issues, exposure to sensitive topics and restricted on-and-off-line sharing and deliberation of sensitive topics, increases the participants external political efficacy, which in turn, encourages their political deliberation online. The author, therefore, argues that the Internet to some extent has been able to promote a form of democratisation in mainland China by cultivating better-informed and more politically active citizens.

The findings about the participants’ experience and understanding of climbing over the Great Wall challenges the belief that a liberalised Internet will bring liberal democracy to mainland China. Internet users in mainland China can access the ‘liberalised’ Internet that citizens in democratic countries enjoy through climbing over the Great Wall. However, only about 5.5 % of Internet users in seven cities of China climb over the Great Wall. What stops them from stepping into the ‘liberalised’ online world? It has been found that climbing over the Great Wall was a matter of interest or motivation instead of a technical matter for university students. Most participants were found to be content with what the controlled Internet provided and possessed neither the motivation nor interest to circumvent the ‘Great Wall’ to access the ‘more liberalised’ world online. Moreover, those who went beyond the ‘Great Wall’ were found to believe that they learned enough about the political system from the controlled Internet and information about and from the ‘outside’ world usually did not change their perspective. Nor did the research find that climbing over the Great Wall made the user more politically active. Their belief that the controlled Internet adequately satisfies their needs and informs them sufficiently about the political system is arguably one of factors that contribute to the lack of motivation to access the liberalised Internet. Therefore, the author argues that there is no ground to assume that a ‘liberalised’ Internet will democratise mainland China or that a controlled Internet will stop mainland China from democratising.

In addition to the influence of Internet use on its users, the research also discovered how the Internet has been making changes in the transition process in mainland China in domains within and beyond politics. The findings resonate with existing studies on the influence of online public opinion on solving social problems and checking government misconduct, especially that of the local government.

The Internet is a medium for both mass and interpersonal communication. The study finds that diffusion and effect of online content follows the two-step or multi-step model and goes beyond the Internet through offline interpersonal communication. Participants reported that they first read a certain piece of political news online on public platforms such as news portals, forums and so on. And then they discussed the news with their friends, classmates, or special groups of people through interpersonal communication channels online like QQ contact. The diffusion and the effect of the news go through two steps from mass communication to interpersonal communication. When receiving a piece of news from a public platform or interpersonal channel online, some participants reported posting it onto a stranger platform with comments. Their posts and comments might attract interaction, further retweeting, or both, and then a multi-step diffusion begins. For some participants, the online diffusion stops at receiving the news, especially when the content is politically sensitive, but the diffusion moved on to offline interpersonal communication. For many university students, this happens in the dormitory where they use the Internet in the presence of peers: roommates and classmates. For others, this may happen at home with family members or other places with colleagues or friends.

Despite censorship and government control, the reflective accounts of the participants paint a picture in which some are communicating political, sometimes politically sensitive content online through various channels, mass or interpersonal; while some dare not to do so, but discuss and disseminate through offline interpersonal channels which they consider safe. Therefore, it is argued that the influence of the Internet goes beyond the Internet. Especially with the growing popularity of mobile phones connecting to the Internet, such interpersonal communication can happen anytime anywhere with various groups of people.

To better understand its influence on democratisation, the Internet’s influence beyond politics cannot be neglected. Participation in activities, associations or organisations with objectives in the political domain is found to be rare among the participants, while involvement in QQ groups and online forums and communities without explicitly stated political objectives is found to be common among the participants. It has been found that a number of Internet applications like online forums, communities, QQ groups and so on, are utilised to bring together people who share an interest. It is in this space that common users communicate, exchange information, and arrange activities, which cast an influence on the real world. Moreover, participants also reported having used the Internet to organise activities and groups to serve their own purposes. Yang (2002) argued that the Internet facilitated civil society activities by offering new possibilities for citizen participation. The author, therefore, argues that the flourishing of online groups, forums and communities, or private associations, marks a rise of a more democratically spirited civil society on the Internet in mainland China.