Off the Spectrum

Written by: Kathleen Walpole

Generation Y¹ in the United States is less politically inclined than older generations. Compared to the Baby Boom Generation² in the United States, Generation Y’s lack of civic engagement is often tied directly to the change in American social and family structures. Robert Putnam argued in his book, Bowling Alone, that compared to the Baby Boom Generation, the youth of America today are less likely to attend rallies, run for local public offices, or stay informed on issues that matter to their communities (Putnam, 2000). Other scholars and journalists have also expressed that Generation Y has become too lazy to care about the issues affecting the world. This concern has caused many to argue that civic engagement levels can be returned through the use of social media.

Firstly, the definition of civic engagement needs to be explored in this context. Good civic engagement is generally built on moral obligations from citizens in a democracy (Walpole, 2012). Citizens have a range of options they can do in order to be civically involved. Lester Milbrath, author of Political Participation, gave a brief sketch of what the various hierarchy levels of political involvement there are. These various levels begin at the basic level with voting and continue to the top of the hierarchical system of holding public office (Rimmerman, 1997).  A citizen does not need to complete all the levels to be apart of the democratic system. Still, the United States needs to become  a spectator free environment.

Aristotle wrote, “ A citizen is who rules and is ruled in turn.” His principle implies that a citizen needs to be educated within a society.   It is a fundamental component of civic engagement. Understanding civic responsibilities as well as current events is vital for a member of the American public to think critically. The bottom line is that the more knowledge an individual has, the more likely he or she is able to participate in the broad range of participation forms that are available (Rosenstone and Hansen, 1993). Education proves more of an incentive for citizens to become mobilized and active in society.

What then does the role of social media play in increasing civic engagement levels?

Social media became an active political tool in the 2008 presidential election. Prior to 2008, the Internet was used in the 2004 presidential election cycle to broadcast messages from candidates and help inform the American public. Surging forward from the 2008 presidential election, the 2010- midterm elections saw a dramatic increase into how social media could be used for elections. In a 2010 report by the Pew Research Center, 21% of online adults were using social networking to engage with candidates (Smith, 2010).  On the other side, though, the use of the websites created by the candidates and the parties does not always directly constitute offline action.  If a person views a Facebook event for a political rally that will occur within the next few days, the fundamental basic ideas of civic engagement still hold the deciding factor of whether that person will attend. Social media can fix part of the failed issues relating to civic engagement levels in the United States, but it cannot solve the whole crisis.

Recent reports published to provide insight into the progress that social media has had on increasing levels of civic engagement.  The 2013 Millennial Civic Health Index, released by the top four civic organizations in the United States, provides an overview of the challenges that are commonly related to Generation Y.   It provided an insight into how Generation played a role in the 2012 presidential election. The report provided the following key insights:

• Comprised a national voting bloc of 21.3% of eligible voters
• College graduate is four or five times likely to engage on issues than a high school graduate
• 22-25 year olds have lower levels of social cohesion and volunteerism

Overall, some of the findings are disappointing.  Subsequently, the recent report (Civic Engagement in the Digital Age) by the Pew Research Center published similar results showing that there is still a need for basic foundations of civic engagement to be restored before even social media even begin to play a mightier role.

In particular, one finding that stands out in the report is that those who are politically active online tend to have relatively high rates of engagement offline (April 2013 Report).    But, correlation does not indicate causation. The respondents in this report by the Pew Research Center do not represent the entire population of Americans, especially Generation Y.  This finding supports the idea that those  engaging both online and offline are helping to shape the hierarchy of civic engagement levels that Lester Milbrath explained.  Online civic engagement that influences activities offline will play a fundamental role in shifting the level of involvement by individuals. Admittedly, though, social media platforms are still changing, and thus, the findings related to the correlation between offline and online activities will be inconclusive for several years.

The analysis of these two reports cited here as well as numerous other commentaries and reports can be discussed at much larger length. Nonetheless, the same statements are commonly argued. Social media does provide hope for the future. There is no lie in that statement, but to what extent that it can help shape knowledge of issues and increase the likelihood for someone to vote is still speculative. It is already July 2013, and with the discussion around the 2014-midterm elections increasing at a rapid rate, new sources of data and insight will emerge. For now, the future awaits.

Footnotes:

Posted on July 25, 2013 at 3:17 am in American Politics, Civic Engagement, Internet, Katie Walpole   |  RSS feed |   Reply   |   Trackback URL