Opinion Climates & Expression in the Electronic Forum
2
1. Equality in Deliberation
In a comprehensive study of participation and equality, Verba, Scholozman and Brady
(1995, p.511) conclude that “the voices of citizens may be loud and clear, but they are not
decidedly equal.” Although certain deliberation theorists tend to de jure take for granted the
equal opportunity to participate in a public forum (e.g., Habermas 1991; Gutmann &
Thompson 1996), citizens’ voices de facto are not equal depending on majority and
minority position (Huckfeldt and Sprague 1995), varying civic skills and social economic
status (Fraser 1992; Verba et al. 1995; Sanders 1997). As Fraser (1992, p.119) states,
Habermas’ definition of equality ignores “informal impediments to participatory parity that
can persist even after everyone is formally and legally licensed to participate” (emphasis
added). Even though all citizens are officially allowed free access to a public forum and to
talk about their views, some unprivileged citizens spontaneously avoid deliberating politics
in a forum, while others are more willing to do so.
Seen against this general backdrop, this study is an effort to examine empirically the
problem of social equality in deliberation. First, this study focuses on the deliberative
process rather than participation itself. Although Verba et al. (1995) found a systematic
inequality in terms of participation in electoral activity, attending community meetings,
joining political organizations and so on, they did not examine the actual processes of
communication that occur while participating. Second, apart from social economic status
and political involvement variables primarily of concern to Verba et al., this study turns
attention to majority and minority positions in deliberation. As the phrase ‘tyranny of the
majority’ suggests, majority and minority issue positions is an important factor that
influence deliberative process. The spiral of silence theory posits that those who consider
themselves as the minority may not only be less inclined to participate, but also less willing
to speak their opinions (Noelle-Neumann 1993; Scheufele & Eveland 2001). If minorities
remain silent or conform to majority views, deliberative public opinion, no matter how well
reasoned it may be, results in majority domination. On the other hand, minority influence
research initiated by Moscovici (1976) suggests that influence is not unidirectional, and
when minorities consistently argue their opinion, majorities are also influenced. Finally, the
Convention