Plataformas Digitais Para a Política Participativa: Espaços de Diálogo Entre Cidadãos e Representantes Públicos

Elizabet Castillero-Ostio; Álvaro Serna-Ortega; Andrea Moreno-Cabanillas

doi:10.17231/volesp(2025).5452

Authors

Elizabet Castillero-Ostio Departamento de Comunicación Audiovisual y Publicidad, Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación, Universidad de Málaga, Málaga, Spain https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0546-7262
Álvaro Serna-Ortega Departamento de Comunicación Audiovisual y Publicidad, Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación, Universidad de Málaga, Málaga, Spain https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5374-4722
Andrea Moreno-Cabanillas Departamento de Comunicación Audiovisual y Publicidad, Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación, Universidad de Málaga, Málaga, Spain https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1169-1607

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17231/volesp(2025).5452

Keywords:

citizen participation, digital platform, participatory politics, freedom of participation, accountability

Abstract

Civic participation in the digital age has changed the dynamics of the internet, allowing users not only to consume information but also to contribute and collaborate in the creation of content. Online platforms for political participation aim to strengthen the quality of democracy and bridge the gap between institutions and citizens by facilitating dialogue with political representatives. The overall objective is to understand the dynamics of citizen participation in Spain through the digital platform Osoigo.com. The research adopts a quantitative approach, analysing interactions in order to identify patterns in communication, content, sentiment and the relationship between questions and answers. The scope is exploratory, addressing descriptive, correlative and inferential aspects through the use of data mining techniques and statistical analysis. The sample is purposively selected based on the popularity of the queries. The main findings show the diversity and plurality of the Spanish political landscape reflected on the platform, with gender inequality and a leftist bias among question recipients. The geographical distribution of questions suggests a general balance, with more attention given to public representatives at the national level, with the exception of right-wing politicians, who receive more regional questions. There is no statistically significant relationship between the sentiment of questions and answers, suggesting that politicians do not adapt their emotional tone to citizens but maintain a consistent emotional response pattern.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Elizabet Castillero-Ostio, Departamento de Comunicación Audiovisual y Publicidad, Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación, Universidad de Málaga, Málaga, Spain

Elizabet Castillero-Ostio is a lecturer and researcher in the Department of Audiovisual Communication and Advertising in the Faculty of Communication Sciences at the University of Malaga. She holds a PhD in Strategic Management in Communication from the University of Malaga, a degree in Advertising and Public Relations and a master’s degree in Strategic Management and Innovation in Communication. She is currently participating in the following competitive research projects: Observatorio de los Gabinetes de Comunicación de Andalucía, Lobby y Comunicación en la Unión Europea. Análisis de Sus Estrategias de Comunicación and Comunicación y Grupos de Interés en Andalucía. Estrategias de Comunicación Para la Participación Ciudadana en Sociedades Inclusivas. Her main current lines of research focus on public relations and political and institutional communication. She is the author of more than 30 academic publications and a researcher in two innovative education projects.

Álvaro Serna-Ortega, Departamento de Comunicación Audiovisual y Publicidad, Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación, Universidad de Málaga, Málaga, Spain

Álvaro Serna-Ortega is a lecturer in the Department of Audiovisual Communication and Advertising at the Faculty of Communication Sciences. He is a contract researcher in the research project Lobby y Comunicación funded by the State R&D&I Programme (CSO2016-79357-R). He is also a PhD student in the Inter-University Doctorate Programme in Communication at the Universities of Cadiz, Huelva, Malaga, and Seville, specialising in Advertising and Public Relations. He holds a degree in Advertising and Public Relations and a master’s in Strategic Management and Innovation in Communication. His research interests include political communication, international relations, and organisational communication.

Andrea Moreno-Cabanillas, Departamento de Comunicación Audiovisual y Publicidad, Facultad de Ciencias de la Comunicación, Universidad de Málaga, Málaga, Spain

Andrea Moreno-Cabanillas is a contract researcher in training (FPU 2019) at the Department of Advertising and Audiovisual Communication at the University of Malaga. She holds a PhD in Communication from the Universities of Cadiz, Huelva, Malaga, and Seville, specialising in Advertising and Public Relations. She earned her undergraduate degree in Advertising and Public Relations from the University of Malaga and a master’s degree in Teacher Training for Secondary Education and Vocational Training from the University of Murcia. She has authored over 50 papers, presented at conferences and published in various outlets. Her research focuses on interest groups and lobbies in the European Union, and she has conducted funded research stays at Universidade de São Paulo (Brazil) and RMIT University (Australia).

References

Aced Toledano, C. (2013). Relaciones públicas 2.0. Cómo gestionar la comunicación corporativa en el entorno digital. UOC.

Aguirre Sala, J. (2013). Nuevos alcances de la participación ciudadana a través de las redes sociales. Culturales, 1(2), 119–150.

Alonso-Muñoz, L., & Casero-Ripollés, A. (2017). Transparencia y monitorización en el entorno digital. Hacia una tipología de las plataformas impulsadas por la ciudadanía. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, Extra, 72(8),1351–1366.

Annunziata, R. (2020). El impacto de los presupuestos participativos online en el tipo de proyectos. Un análisis de la experiencia de BAElige. Revista del CLAD. Reforma y Democracia, (77), 57–186.

Annunziata, R., Arena, E., & Basualdo Franchino, U. (2021). ¿Giro digital? Desafíos de los presupuestos participativos argentinos frente a la pandemia de COVID-19. Política. Revista de Ciencia Política, 59(1), 59–80. https://doi.org/10.5354/0719-5338.2021.61609

Baggiolini, L., & Castro-Rojas, S. (2016). Las redes de la política: Universo narrativo, campañas y microrrelato en Twitter. Inmediaciones de la Comunicación, 11, 159–180. https://doi.org/10.18861/ic.2016.11.11.2621

Balla, S. (2012). Information technology, political participation and the evolution of Chinese policymaking. Journal of Contemporary China, 21(76), 655–673. https://doi.org/10.1080/10670564.2012.666835

Brady, H. (1999). Political participation. In J. P. Robinson, P. R. Shaver, & L. S. Wrightsman (Eds.), Measures of political attitudes (pp. 737–801). Academic Press.

Burgos, E. (2020). Ciberactivismo, ejercicio de la ciudadanía y participación política en internet. Abediciones.

Cabero Almenara, J. (2014). Nuevas miradas sobre las TIC aplicadas en la educación. Andalucía Educativa, 81, 1–6.

Cabero-Almenara, J., Torres-Barzabal, L., & Hermosilla-Rodríguez, J. (2019). Las TIC y la creación de una ciudadanía crítica e-digital. Education in the Knowledge Society, 20, 1–10. https://doi.org/10.14201/eks2019_20_a22

Castellanos Claramunt, J. (2022). Transparencia y participación ciudadana: La lucha contra la corrupción como eje vertebrador del proceso democrático. Revista Española de Transparencia, (15), 107–129. https://doi.org/10.51915/ret.220

Cazorla, A., Montabes J., & López-López, P. (2022). Medios de comunicación, información política y emociones hacia partidos políticos en España. Revista Española de Ciencia Política, (58), 83–109. https://doi.org/10.21308/recp.58.03

Coleman, S., & Moss, G. (2012). Under construction: The field of online deliberation research. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 9(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2011.635957

Dahlgren, P. (2005). The Internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political communication, 22(2), 147–162. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584600590933160

Desouza, K. C., & Bhagwatwar, A. (2014). Technology-enabled participatory platforms for civic engagement: The case of U.S. Cities. Journal of Urban Technology, 21(4), 25–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/10630732.2014.954898

Eisenberg, J. (2006). Internet, democracia y república. Revista Interamericana de Educación de Adultos, 28(1), 175–192.

García Guitián, E. (2016). Democracia digital. Discursos sobre participación ciudadana y TIC. Revista de Estudios Políticos, (173), 169–193. https://doi.org/10.18042/cepc/rep.173.05

Gil García, J. (2015). Cuando el 15M envejeció a los medios de comunicación: Emergencia de prosumidores y desarrollo de nuevos modelos mediáticos. Aposta. Revista de Ciencias Sociales, (66), 9–37.

Graham, T. (2010). The use of expressives in online political talk: Impeding or facilitating the normative goals of deliberation? In E. Tambouris, A. Macintosh, & O. Glassey (Eds.), Electronic participation, lecture notes in computer science (pp. 26–41). Springer.

Guillory, J., & Sundar, S. (2014). How does web site interactivity affect our perceptions of an organization? Journal of Public Relations Research, 26(1), 44–61. https://doi.org/10.1080/1062726X.2013.795866

Hartz-Karp, J., & Sullivan, B. (2014). The unfulfilled promise of online deliberation. Journal of Deliberative Democracy, 10(1), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.191

Hershkovitz, S. (2012). Masbirim Israel: Israel’s PR campaign as glocalized and grobalized political prosumption. American Behavioral Scientist, 56(4), 511–530. https://doi.org/10.1177/000276421142936

Leetoy, S., Zavala Scherer, D., & Sierra Caballero, F. (2019). Tecnopolítica y ciudadanía digital. Comunicación y Sociedad, 16, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.32870/cys.v2019i0.7462

Luvizotto, C. K. (2016). Cidadania, ativismo e participação na internet: Experiências brasileiras. Comunicação e Sociedade, 30, 297–312. https://doi.org/10.17231/comsoc.30(2016).2499

Magallón Rosa, R. (2014). Tecnologías cívicas y participación ciudadana. Revista de Estudios de la Juventud, (105), 53–79.

Mambrey, P., Neumann, H., & Sieverdingbeck, K. (1999). Bridging the gap between Parliament and citizen – The internet services of the German Bundestag. Parliamentary Affairs, 52(3), 480–492. https://doi.org/10.1093/pa/52.3.480

Manosevitch, I. (2014). The design of online deliberation: Implications for practice, theory and democratic citizenship. Journal of Public Deliberation, 10(1), 1–4. https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.197

Martínez Rodríguez, J.B. (2011). Participación política, democracia digital y e-ciudadanía para el protagonismo de adolescentes y jóvenes. Revista Electrónica Interuniversitaria de Formación del Profesorado, 14(2), 19–33.

Masip, P., Ruiz-Caballero, C., & Suau, J. (2019). Active audiences and social discussion on the digital public sphere. Review article. El Profesional de la Información, 28(2), e280204. https://doi.org//10.3145/epi.2019.mar.04

Mendonça, R. F., & Amaral, F. de L. (2014). Deliberação online em consultas públicas? O caso da Assembleia Legislativa de Minas Gerais. Revista de Sociologia Política, 22(49), 177–203. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-44782014000100010

Oliveira, R. S. de, & Rodegheri, L. B. (2012). Ciberdemocracia: Análise dos desafios e possibilidades de iniciativa popular via internet no Brasil. Sociedade e Cultura, 15(1), 121–133. https://doi.org/10.5216/sec.v15i1.20678

Orozco, M., & Ortiz-Ayala, A. (2014). Deliberación: Actividad política en internet y redes sociales en Colombia. Panorama, 8(15), 91–100.

Pinto Santos, A. R., Cortés Peña, O., & Alfaro Camargo, C. (2017). Hacia la transformación de la práctica docente: Modelo espiral de competencias TICTACTEP. Pixel-Bit. Revista de Medios y Educación, (51), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.12795/pixelbit.2017.i51.03

Reig Hernández, D. (2011, October 11). TIC, TAC, TEP y el 15 de octubre. El Caparazón (2007). https://dreig.eu/caparazon/tic-tac-tep/

Reig Hernández, D. (2012). Socionomía: ¿Vas a perderte la revolución social? Deusto.

Ribeiro, L., Costa, A., Costa, L., & Ribeiro, M. (2013). Desigualdades digitais: Acesso e uso da internet, posição socioeconómica e segmentação espacial nas metrópoles brasileiras. Análise Social, 48(207), 288–320. https://doi.org/10.31447/AS00032573.2013207.02

Sampaio, R. C. (2012). Quão deliberativas são discussões na rede? Um modelo de apreensão da discussão online. Revista Sociologia Política, 20(42), 121–139. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-44782012000200010

Sampaio, R. C., Maia, R. C. M., & Marques, P. J. A. (2010). Participação e deliberação na internet: Um estudo de caso do orçamento participativo digital de Belo Horizonte. Opinião Pública, 16(2), 446–477. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-62762010000200007

Sánchez-Villar, J. M. (2019). Los blogs como herramientas sociales de comunicación política: Periodismo ciudadano y opinión pública 2.0. Communication & Society, 32(1), 39–55. https://doi.org/10.15581/003.32.1.39-55

Sani, G. (2004). Verbete “participação política”. In N. Bobbio, N. Matteucci, & G. Pasquino (Eds.), Dicionário de política (p. 954). Editora UNB.

Santini, R.M., & Carvalho, H. (2019). Plataformas online de participação cidadã: Meta-síntese e avaliação crítica de seus impactos sociais e políticos. Comunicação e Sociedade, 36, 163–182. https://doi.org/10.17231/comsoc.36(2019).2350

Saylan, I. (2009). Internet: “A gateway to democracy? A comparative analysis of Turkish and Italian e-government experiences”. AmmeİdaresiDergisi, 42(3), 141–162.

Schäfer, M. S. (2015). Digital public sphere. The International Encyclopedia of Political Communication, 15, 1–7.

Scolari, C. (2008). Hipermediaciones. Elementos para una teoría de la comunicación digital interactiva. Gedisa.

Solop, F. I. (2001). Digital democracy comes of age: Internet voting and the 2000 Arizona democratic primary election. PS: Political Science & Politics, 34(2), 289–293. https://doi.org/10.1017/S104909650100052X

Steinmann R., Krek A., & Blaschke T. (2005). Can online map-based applications improve citizen participation? In M. Böhlen, J. Gamper, W. Polasek, & M. A. Wimmer (Eds.), E-Government: Towards electronic democracy. TCGOV 2005. Lecture notes in computer science (pp. 25–35). Springer.

Strandberg, K. (2008). Public deliberation goes on-line? An analysis of citizens’ political discussions on the internet prior to the Finnish parliamentary elections in 2007. Javnost – The Public, 15(1), 71–89. https://doi.org/10.1080/13183222.2008.11008965

Strandberg, K., & Grönlund, K. (2018). Online deliberation. In A. Bächtiger, J. Dryzek, J. Mansbridge, & M. Warren (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of deliberative democracy (pp. 93–113). Oxford University Press.

Tettey, W. J. (2001). Information technology and democratic participation in Africa. Journal of Asian and African Studies, 36(1), 133–153. https://doi.org/10.1163/156852101300143127

Torcal, M., Montero, J. R., & Teorell, J. (2006). La participación política en España: Modos y niveles en perspectiva comparada. Revista de Estudios Políticos, (132), 7–41. https://doi.org/10.18042/45507

Verba S., Schlozman K. L., & Brady H. E. (1995). Voice and equality: Civic voluntarism in American politics. Harvard University Press.

Welp, Y. (2008). América Latina en la era del gobierno electrónico. Análisis de la introducción de nuevas tecnologías para la mejora de la democracia y el gobierno. Revista del CLAD. Reforma y Democracia, (41), 173–192.

Westholm, H. (2002). e-DemocracyGoesAhead. The internet as a tool for improving deliberative policies? In R. Traunmüller, & K. Lenk (Eds.), Electronic government. EGOV 2002, 2456 (pp. 240–247). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-46138-8_39

Zambrano Farias, F. J., & Balladares Ponguillo, K. A. (2017). Sociedad del conocimiento y las TEPs. INNOVA Research Journal, 2(10), 169–177. https://doi.org/10.33890/innova.v2.n10.2017.534