Search

Free, open-source participatory platforms like Decidim or Consul were designed by the 15M' citizen activists in Spain. Initially implemented in Barcelona and Madrid, these platforms are spread in many countries. Castells has not examined the institutionalization of the 15M's offspring, and thus we aim to contribute by studying the rollout of the Decidim platform in Catalan municipalities. We examine its disruptive potential along three democratic dimensions: transparency, participation and deliberation. Our study combines in-depth interviews and an online questionnaire administered to public officials in charge of the platform and analyses the levels of participation on the platform. The research shows elements of managerial continuity: the most valued goals are transparency, organisation of information and the collection of citizen proposals, rather than deliberation and transfer of sovereignty towards citizens. However, the platform forces administrations to consider individual citizens' inputs, increases citizens' proposals and initiatives, and brings in new participant publics. Furthermore, democratic innovation is being pushed ahead by a networkof activists and technological experts that continuously improve the platform and function as a counter-power (Castells, 2015, 2016). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effect of social media as a potential sphere for public deliberation still remains unclear. For some analysts, social media can create a vibrant space for political discussion, whereas others believe they do not provide the right conditions for meaningful interaction and could even have negative effects on public opinion by, for instance, fostering communication within isolated enclaves. Focusing on the debate surrounding Catalonia's secession, this article analyses the interaction on Twitter between the opposite sides of this divisive political issue. Carefully based on a nonbiased random sampling procedure, we describe Twitter conversations through network and content analyses, using both indicators of the structure of conversations and opinion diversity. Remarkably, we find that Twitter users cross lines of difference and interact with people holding opposing views. Through a regression analysis, we show that the level of reciprocity, understood as repeated interaction and measured by the depth of the conversation, is explained by heterogeneity and associated with a higher involvement of the pro-independence side. However, if heterogeneity is combined with extremism, the development of longer conversations is severely cut. Overall, this article points toward the actual use of social media as a space for cross-cutting communication and debate despite strong disagreement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]