Note: This section is aimed at addressing potential societal concerns for problems impeding the success of the site or adverse social affects it may have. It is not addressing logistical problems such as security or moderation of content as those factors are covered in other sections. This is not a comprehensive list but it does exemplify that Digital Citizen is well aware of, and well prepared, to overcome the challenges it will face. This section should help relieve concerns held by skeptics.

Sparking Interest

Lack of interest in politics is probably the largest hurtle to overcome, and currently it is probably the biggest threat to the development of a stronger democracy in the US. Complacence, aversion to controversy, and a sense of helplessness to affect change have made much of society shy away from being politically active, and it is possible that Digital Citizen will fail to significantly change this in the near future. However, the alternative to creating a resource like the Digital Citizen website is really to surrender in the fight for a greater democracy. Even in the worst case scenario, if the site does not change our society overnight, it can be a catalyst for future similar projects and its persistence over time will surely make politics easier to access, less stigmatized, and more meaningful to the average citizen.

 Achieving Bipartisanship

Partisanship in the United States is a well-known problem as a leading cause of gridlock in Congress, and makes it harder for the public to find common ground in political deliberations (Schickler, 2012). It is possible that the Digital Citizen site could have the adverse effect of increasing partisanship, at least in the short run. Harvard law professor and author of “Wiser: Getting Beyond Group Think to Make Groups Smarter, Cass Sunstein (2015), researched the nature of political interactions finding that when people of similar political viewpoints interact, their positions become more extreme to the right or left of the liberal/conservative spectrum. He finds that human beings have a tendency to surround themselves with likeminded people and interact in an “echo chamber” which amplifies their current beliefs and political stance. Even when evidence introduced, if that evidence conflicts with an individual’s core values or belief system, they can irrationally deny its validity (Sunstein, 2015). An element of Sunstien’s (2015) conclusion for combating this problem of polarization in group think is to increase our interactions with people of varying viewpoints and even to diversify the exposure of viewpoints for members of Congress.

Digital Citizen will “venture into uncharted territory” by increasing online political interaction in such a topic specific way, and the result may be an amplified “echo chamber”, at least in the short run. However, the design of the site strongly encourages users to be exposed to the Counterweight section and in debates one will be likely to engage competing interests. Increased interaction across the ideological spectrum can reveal to us that we are more alike than we might expect. It can humanize a demonized opposition, make us think more carefully about our positions on issues, make more informed decisions, learn respect and humility, and take steps to find compromise. Similar to the threat of low levels of political interest, the issue of partisanship will be an ongoing battle and to neglect the opportunity of using technology to combat this problem is to surrender in defeat. The Counterweight feature of the site is designed specifically to combat this problem but the site as a whole should also help in this regard as people interact regarding political issues more than ever before.

Powerful Interests

Many fear the influence of interest groups because for every group one supports, there is probably another to oppose it. Interest groups may attempt to manipulate Digital Citizen by creating fake profiles or using their social influence to simply gain more power than they already have via this new medium for mobilizing supporters. In some sense, if one fears this problem, one fears democracy itself, and does not have faith in the majority of the population to be active informed moral citizens who typically support interests that truly benefit society. Democracy is the prevailing political structure in more developed nations because many people believe that it has a unique ability to yield better societal outcomes, and is most likely to protect human rights. While Digital Citizen may simply present another opportunity for minority interest groups to seize stronger control of our political system, the more likely outcome, and significantly more valuable reward, of having an increasingly active and informed electorate, is well worth the risk of handing more control to special interests, who essentially have a hand in every legislative outcome in the status quo anyway. We almost have nothing to lose, and everything to gain on this front, assuming we believe in the ability of democracy to overcome backwards political interests with the power of increased civic activity.

Digital Citizen’s Defense against Conflicts of Interest

Digital Citizen may be subject to conflict of interest accusations and to combat that problem the site will seek to operate as a non-profit so that the funding it obtains does not come with any strings attached. If this method of funding does not sustain the organization it can explore a for profit model generating revenues from offerings like purchases to enhance the DigiCiti Builder game. This would also be a harmless in terms of conflicts of interest problems because it would not offer the users any political advantage and the money comes from diffuse sources in small amounts so that there is no question of incentive for Digital Citizen to be beholden to any particular political interests. The content on the site will be provided by users or drawn from public information provided by the government. Accessible news sources connected to the site are presented without filters applied by Digital Citizen. The site does not take a political stance on issues and merely acts as a platform for interaction. Any political views expressed by those under the employ of Digital Citizen are not representative of views held by the organization and shall in no way affect the content on the site. Healthy political deliberation depends on the protection of free speech and the mission of Digital Citizen is to increase the quality and amount of interaction by providing a space where anyone can express their views and can stand out as an important influence simply by the merits of their actions and support from their peers.

Manipulation of Statistics

The statistics section of the site could be subject to manipulation or simply lead to inaccurate analysis of data to be used in misleading arguments. Many would contend that the present state of accessibility to social data is poor and that Digital Citizen may just be another means of accessing poor data with regard to certain issues. Despite this claim, it can likely tell us a great deal about those who are politically active online, and that group is likely to be an increasingly representative sample of society in the future.

Politics is not a Game?

The honor badge system and DigiCiti Builder game might be frowned upon by some because it could lead to shallow use of the site instigated by gamesmanship instead of sincere and responsible political interest. It is the position of Digital Citizen that those who view the site as a game will still probably benefit our society by their interactions on the site, even if they are motivated by superficial factors. This is true for two main reasons; one because the superficial users will still likely find issues they consider seriously, and two because even if they never contribute in an intentionally meaningful way, the uniquely special gift of democracy’s power to self-correct will have other serious users respond to baseless arguments with ideas that win by their merits. This principle is somewhat analogous to the way that inoculations work in the human body. When we defeated smallpox it was by injecting non-lethal doses of the virus so that our antibodies could learn to fight the real threat by developing immunity. Injecting weak ideas into our political deliberations can inoculate the political sphere of communications by revealing the toxic ideas to our serious members of society and empowering them to fight off failed ideas much like creating an antibody against a virus.

Closing Note: With all of the potential problems surrounding this site, the benefits toward a greater democracy still far outweigh all the potential problems. Many of the problems are already deeply rooted in our society and, for those of us trying to fix them, it is only common sense that we use our new found technological powers to try and overcome them.