Managing the Digital Space of Political Communications: Current Challenges
Keywords:
Political communication, digital sovereignty, non-institutional forms of power, subject of Internet communication, management algorithms, digital eliteAbstract
The intensive development of digital information and communication technologies sets new goals and objectives for society and the state: to introduce data processing tools and Internet communication algorithms into many processes, including the space of political communications. However, the use of such technologies leads to new challenges and threats: the loss of subjectivity by the state, society and human in the communication processes; the transformation of the value-semantic space; the formation of a “digital elite” that claims to become a subject of management and actually manages the communication processes. These problems raise the need to achieve the digital sovereignty of the state as a necessary condition for ensuring security. Algorithms trained on Big Data about users can control their consciousness and worldview, shape their beliefs and behavior. A person cannot distinguish who is communicating with him — a real user or an algorithm. On the one hand, a person has the freedom to be anyone on the Web. On the other hand, he loses subjectivity in communication processes. Algorithms that offer the user content in accordance with his/her beliefs and interests contribute to the formation of echo chambers in which a person’s subjective views are reinforced, and he/she is isolated from alternative points of view, which cannot contribute to consensus. These mechanisms contribute to the atomization of society, which does not allow its consolidation to be maintained. The state and its institutions need to preserve the possibility of influencing the processes of communication, political discourse management, and interpretation of information in the digital space. In this case, the state can protect the information and value-semantic space from the destructive influence of other actors who seek to control the consciousness of users. On the basis of an interdisciplinary approach using knowledge of data science and methods of structural-functional and discursive approaches, the article proposes a classification of the stages of encoding and decoding political information, which makes it possible to determine the subjects of power. In addition, the author’s approach to the definition of the digital space of political communications and digital sovereignty of the modern state is formulated in the article.
References
Артамонова Ю.Д. Политическая коммуникация в современном мире: базовые модели. М.: Издательство Московского университета, 2020.
Ван Дейк Т.А. Дискурс и власть: Репрезентация доминирования в языке и коммуникации М.: УРСС: Книжный дом «ЛИБРОКОМ», 2015.
Кастельс М. Власть коммуникации. М.: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 2017.
Косоруков А.А. Нейроинтерфейсы в государственном управлении: возможности и ограничения // Государственное управление. Электронный вестник. 2023. № 97. С. 155–173. DOI: 10.24412/2070-1381-2023-97-155-173
Манн М. Власть в XXI столетии: беседы с Джоном А. Холлом. М.: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 2014.
Пугачев В.П. Управление свободой. М.: ЛЕНАНД, 2018.
Пугачев В.П. Глобалистский тоталитаризм: Социальные мутации цифрового капитализма: формирование человека и манипулятивные технологии управления. М.: ЛЕНАНД, 2022.
Срничек Н. Капитализм платформ. М.: Изд. дом Высшей школы экономики, 2020.
Федорченко С.Н. Власть алгоритма: технологии легитимации политических режимов в условиях цифровизации. М.: Проспект, 2023.
Adamopoulou E., Moussiades L. Chatbots: History, Technology, and Applications // Machine Learning with Applications. 2020. Vol. 2. DOI: 10.1016/j.mlwa.2020.100006
Beer D. The Social Power of Algorithms // Information, Communication & Society. 2017. Vol. 20. Is. 1. P. 1–13. DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2016.1216147
Bernays E. The Engineering of Consent // Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. 1947. Vol. 250. Is. 1. P. 113–120.
Beznosov M.A., Golikov A.S. Digital Echo Chambers as Phenomenon of Political Space // Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Политология. 2022. Т. 24. № 3. С. 499–516. DOI: 10.22363/2313-1438-2022-24-3-499-516
Collington R. Disrupting the Welfare State? Digitalisation and Retrenchment of Public Sector Capacity // New Political Economy. 2022. Vol. 27. Is. 2. P. 312–328. DOI: 10.1080/13563467.2021.1952559
Gran A.-B., Booth P., Bucher T. To Be or Not To Be Algorithm Aware: A Question of New Digital Divide? // Information, Communication & Society. 2021. Vol. 24. Is. 12. P. 1779–1796. DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2020.1736124
Harel T.O., Jameson J.K., Maoz I. The Normalization of Hatred: Identity, Affective Polarization, and Dehumanization on Facebook in the Context of Intractable Political Conflict // Social Media + Society. 2020. Vol. 6. Is. 2. DOI: 10.1177/2056305120913983
Volodenkov S.V., Fedorchenko S.N., Artamonova Yu.D. Contemporary State in the Context of Digital Technological Transformations: Political Opportunities, Risks, and Challenges // Вестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Политология. 2022. Т. 24. № 3. С. 351–366. DOI: 10.22363/2313-1438-2022-24-3-351-366
Zuboff S. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: Public Affairs, 2019.