I often talk about the conversation about online voting and how one-sided it can be. When I refer to this “conversation” I am referring to it in a very general sense. No matter what the forum – online blog posts, comments sections of online articles,cable television, local and national radio, or newspapers – I strongly believe that the future of online voting in the United States lies in the framing of “the conversation”.
The reason I started this blog is because when I first began to research the subject I was shocked by how one-sided that conversation was. I started of course by searching the terms “internet voting” and “online voting”. Expecting to find a mixture of results perhaps talking about the current status of the technology, I was instead met with nothing but very “over the top”, loud and often nasty opposition to the very thought of Online Voting. Once I thoroughly researched the subject I realized that the average person was being highly misled by some very avid activist detractors.
The detractors of online voting have completely dominated the conversation for over a decade by successfully controlling the framing of that conversation.
But hopefully times are changing. I was recently asked to participate in a live NPR radio show discussion about online voting.
I found myself debating Avi Rubin, an academic who has made a career out of bashing online voting for a very long time. He had his say, and made his boilerplate remarks. Usually there is nobody to counter these claims. But this time I had the opportunity to make my case. The listeners of the program could judge for themselves regarding the validity of both of our arguments.
This is all we advocates ask regarding online voting. All we ask is an opportunity to be part of a balanced discussion on what could be one of the most important issues of our time.
I would like to thank the producers of the “Midday with Dan Rodricks” show for allowing me to take part in the recent discussion. I look forward to future opportunities to do so.