Please answer one (1) of the following questions, due by next week's class time.  Answers should be at least 2-3 pages long and should refer to the assigned readings.

  1.)     In trying to understand the disconnect between citizens and government, Putnam points to the erosion of traditional institutions and social capital, and argues that the base of meaningful political activity, civil society, is too diminished to produce citizens with a sense of obligation towards their community. He locates much of the blame for this erosion on the effects of communication technology which he thinks isolate people from each other, sucks up leisure time, and substitutes simulated community for real interpersonal  connection. To remedy this problem, he would try to reinvigorate local community institutions. Others, like London, argue that virtual community is reflective of changes in our society, cannot be reversed,  and can offer new and better  ways of political mobilization. Where do you place yourself in this debate? Why?

  2.)  Many people, especially those who would support a model of participatory democracy, see the increase in cynicism towards authority figures and political leaders as a troubling development which will lead to further alienation from political institutions. Proponents of this view would support the restoration of strong, intact families, increased respect for authority, and more focus in schools on civic education and civic obligation as the best means of restoring the public role in the political process. Others see the cynicism towards political leaders as a natural reaction to the "packaged"  political products and speeches presented to the public, and not as a sign of alienation, but sophistication. Where do you place yourself in this debate? Why? What changes do you see as most helpful to restore a strong public role?

3.) Boyd argues that we need to re-think some of our concepts and understanding of public/private relationships when dealing with on-line networking sites like myspace and facebook. She argues that there is a false sense of intimacy and friendship that is created for those who regularly read profiles or blogs written by those they only know on-line, and that users assume they have control over their audience and who views their sites that is equally false. Based on the changes between how the users assume they will be viewed and how they could potentially be perceived, she argues that it is important to develop a better understanding and distinction between the virtual world and the actual world and also pay more attention to ensuring that some control over viewing rests with the users and not the site owners.  What do you make of her argument? Is she exaggerating the dangers of on-line networking or do we need to learn a new vocabulary to capture the reality of virtual interactions? Why?