Wandel der Kommunikation in der digitalen Welt: Pluralisierung, Individualisierung und Dynamisierung als Herausforderungen für Parlamente

Abstract

How is parliamentary communication changing as a result of parliaments, committees, and MPs using digital media? There are three important changes . First, parliamentary commu- nication is becoming more pluralized; more parliamentary voices are being heard . Second, it is becoming more individualized; messages are more individually tailored . Third, it is becoming more dynamic, i .e . faster and shorter, more volatile and more surprising . These changes are ambivalent . Following Jürgen Habermas, Utz Schliesky emphatically warns of the dangers . But: the warnings are not sufficiently backed up by empirical evidence . After all, there is no evidence of a terminal decline of parliaments after 30 years of experience with digital media . Furthermore, an international comparison of parliaments would not provide any evidence that the more a parliament used digital options, the less important it would become in shaping public opinion . And above all: the view of the disintegration of parliament through digital-based communication is not shared by parliamentary players – on the contrary . The following speaks against the measures proposed by Schliesky . First, instead of a “self-restriction”, a communication code for MPs would make sense . Second, in the “rules of the game for digital spaces”, it remains unclear where there is a regulatory gap . And third, “public digital platforms” are by no means politically feasible .