32
Emre Erdoğan
The proliferation of Internet use in Turkey provides opportunities for political participati-
on all over the world and Turkey which is of great importance concerning the quality of
Turkish democracy. The rate of Internet use in Turkey has dramatically increased over the
last 13 years -from 7 percent in 2004 to 81 percent due the latest research- and penetra-
tion of Internet use on such a wide range made significant effects on the structure of our
society; the emergence of a new generation with distinctive behavior patterns and ha-
bits compared with their parents become obvious. Although about 90 percent of Turkish
youngsters have access to the Internet, scores for political objectives in Internet use are
very limited. By focusing on Turkish youngsters, whether opportunities offered by Internet
use presents an alternative instrument for political participation is discussed throughout
the research study. The aim is to explore political participation patterns of Turkish youth
over the Internet as well as the determinants of these patterns based on 1804 face to
face interviews conducted in Turkey with a group of youngsters between 18-29 ages. A
research questionnaire is prepared in cooperation with the framework of Power2Youth
Project conducted in seven countries.
The discussions considering the benefits of Internet use gather around two opposite
sides; optimists, who are pro mobility hypothesis, and pessimists. Optimists argue that
Internet may increase political participation quantitatively and transform it qualitatively in
favor of democracy by creating a new public sphere. (Norris, 2001). Optimistic approach
claims that opportunities offered by Internet use and other digital media may encourage
citizens who do not participate in politics to participate and who participate to do more
by reaching the level of grassroots. Mobility thesis defenders argue that this type of par-
ticipation has no equivalent in the “offline” world and that online political participation
presents a brand new participation type; that is why tools for understanding conventional
political participation are insufficient to capture this unique type of participation (Marien,
Hooghe, and Quintelier 2010; Stolle, Hooghe, and Micheletti 2005; Whiteley 2011, Gibson
and Cantijoch 2013, Van Zoonen and Hirzalla 2011). The defenders of the other camp,
on the other hand, argue that, based on Putnam’s (2000) “time substitution hypothesis”,
the time spent on using various communication tools cause concessions from social
relations which may end up with lower social capital and thus lower political and social
participation. As a result, they conclude that the more one uses the Internet, the more
they isolate themselves from others and show less civil and political participation. (No-
veck 2000; Davis 1999; Nie and Erbing 2000; Nie and Erbring, 2002; Kraut et al., 1998).
Another criticism for mobility hypothesis comes from the defenders of “reinforcement
hypothesis” which is developed by Verba, Schlozman and Brady in 1995. They argue that
opportunities offered by the Internet cannot be enjoyed equally by all and it may reinforce
discrepancies in society by making louder the voice of people who are already influential.
Reinforcement hypothesis depends on resources approach which is valid in civil and po-
litical participation area. The logic is based on a simple cost calculation, which includes
money, time, cognitive capacity and relations; higher costs mean lower participation.
