Putnam Theory is Outdated

            While Robert Putnam’s interpretation of digital media as a cause of disengagement was debatable at the time Bowling Alone was published, since 2000 however, Putnam’s ideas have become antiquated. With the advent of the digital age and the plugging in of human society, what was once perceived as a threat to social capital is now its greatest protector and developer since bowling leagues.

Lincoln Dahlberg’s perception of the internet as a tool for democratic engagement is more persuasive because he uses up-to-date examples of the internet as a tool for social capital development. Whether he is explaining counter-publics with the South Asian Women’s Network or Autonomist Marxist via wikis, Dahlberg’s evidence shows thousands of people banding together and creating communities on the internet. Now people often belong to dozens of internet group, and they can use the internet to meet people as well as build social capital online.

The deliberative digital democracy position says that people will get together in forum and deliberate on their views of politics. “Rational deliberation is also identified as taking place, if less ideally, through the writing and commentary of online citizen journalism and ‘serious’ media sites” (Dahlberg). Normal citizens can form communities and discuss with one another in digital forums rather than the bowling alley or PTA meetings. Inciting change does not have to come from finding your way to a socialist club or a feminist rally. While Putnam claims that we are losing valuable interactions, they are merely changing form. For instance, there is a Facebook group for the United Students Against Sweatshops on campus that often posts about their meetings and their progress with the university bookstore. While most people cannot be there physically, the group meets once a week at night, allowing people to join and keep up with their progress and comment on their actions using Facebook. If the online group did not exist, that sphere of influence would be inaccessible to the population of students who do not have the time or ability to make their meetings. Rather than the internet destroying social capital, it is actually building it. Allowing people to get connected with one another when they otherwise would not have been able to due to location and time. The internet is therefore building our communities and facilitating democracy by allowing the free exchange of ideas.  

Life in the minority world

Putnam’s theory of people needing to be physically near each other to gain one another’s trust and be amiable is outdated. If you want to join a bowling club, there are a plethora of groups on Facebook to meet your social needs or you could bowl online with thousands of other people. Putnam’s shortcomings probably arise from the years that his research was taken. The late 90’s had far less social media sites. Facebook was several years from its inception and other technological advances such as faster computers and better design made the internet sphere seem less attractive. Dahlberg’s theories have a better base in contemporary society, so his position is intuitively superior and with an almost endless stream of counterexamples to Putnam’s argument, making Dahlberg more convincing.