[ad_1]
Open discourse is a conversation with accessible information and minimal controls. It depends on access, equality, and quality of information. The Internet has opened up access to information, but questions remain about its quality. Truly open discourse may be impossible due to filters and limitations.
Open discourse is a conversation in which all possible information is accessible to the participants. It is also about the degree to which any speech can exist without controls. Open discourse is determined by a number of factors, including access and quality, as well as genuine openness of dialogue. Some people debate whether total open speech is actually possible.
Speech is the discussion of ideas. The formation of a real dialogue, followed by the formation of consensus, depends on the speech. Not all talks have the potential to become completely open; for example, rhetoric is the attempt to persuade others of a belief. This means that only one opinion is presented and listeners do not have immediate access to other opinions and details that may contradict it.
Whether or not the conversation is open depends on a number of factors. These include access to information, equality of access and quality of information. Access can be defined by the amount of information available to the people involved or those wishing to be involved and the means by which the information is made available. Equality of access is defined as all people having the same level of access regardless of position, status and social background.
Both access and equality of access are governed by discourse control. Access to information is largely controlled by the people and organizations that have the information. Those who control the information or debate are often in control, unless government law forces them to relinquish control through free speech or freedom of information. For example, there can be no real debate about the economy or immigration if the government withholds information.
Requests for information can also be opened or closed. For example, an ideologically motivated individual can only take information compatible with her ideology, even when all the information is freely available. This form of speech control is bottom-up rather than top-down.
An open conversation also allows for the discussion of topics that many find distasteful or unconventional. For example, expressing views on marriage, religion or abortion may offend some people as many have completely different views on these topics; however, open discourse on all topics, even difficult ones, is important to keep discussions relevant. The absence of open discourse can make arguments stagnant.
The Internet has opened up access to information for many people. However, whether or not it truly counts as open speech is open to debate. Taken together, this openness allows for all opinions and much information to be found, but any single piece of social media or website may not meet many established criteria for open discourse. Questions also remain about the quality of information available on the Internet.
It has been argued that truly open discourse is impossible because there are too many possible filters determining what can and cannot be discussed, what information is available, the quality of the discourse, and people’s access to it. According to the same train of thought, it is also impossible to have a closed discourse, the total absence of access. If both are impossible to achieve, then it suggests that all types of speech are confused somewhere in between.
[ad_2]