Emerging online discussions in a Weibo (micro-blogging) platform argue for the new possibility of online deliberation in Chinese cyberspace. In order to ascertain the extent to which this platform is being used, the author has conducted a case study to measure the quality of deliberation of an online discussion of genetically modified (GM) foods in the comment section of posts written by Mr. Cui and Mr. Fang on Tencent Weibo. In order to gain a comprehensive understanding of the data, both methods of Discourse Quality Index (DQI) and interview have been used. The findings of the research indicate that the online discussion fails to meet two necessary criteria of deliberation: rational and logical statements and consensus building. However, the study results are not totally negative, since the levels of interaction, information exchange, mutual understanding and neutral expression are relatively high. According to the author, in the contemporary stage, online authoritarian deliberation faces many problems in the PRC. At micro level, first, online expression is irrational and illogical; second, it is hard to reach consensus building; third, participants are stubborn to their pre-given wills; forth, some people are indifferent to online discussions. At macro level, first, most of the online discussions have low external impact on decision-making; second, the strong government control may hinder the development of online deliberation.

Disertacija siekiama įvertinti pasirinkto socialinio tinklo viešojo diskurso potencialą demokratinių procesų palaikymui. Tirtos viešosios klimato kaitos diskusijos (komentarai) socialiniame tinkle Facebook. Empiriniams duomenims surinkti ir apdoroti naudojamas Diskurso kokybės indeksas: įvertinta, kaip analizuojamų komentarų kokybė atitinka idealųjį habermasiškąjį diskurso kokybės supratimą. Analizuojant ir interpretuojant surinktus duomenis, įvertintos Web 2.0 komunikacijos charakteristikos (kaip galimybės ir kliūtys svarstomosios demokratijos procesams palaikyti); taip pat aptarti klimato kaitos moksliniai ir politiniai aspektai (aktualizuojant rizikos komunikacijos ir deliberatyviosios demokratijos teorines prieigas). Tyrimo rezultatai atskleidė, jog analizuotų viešų komentarų kokybė yra nepakankama, kad galėtų daryti konkrečią įtaką politinių sprendimų priėmimo procesuose. Pagrindinės to priežastys: a) auditorijų poliarizacija; b) nesutarimais grįsta politinė diskusija; c) nepakankamas dalyvių mokslinis ir politinis išprusimas; d) nerimtas dalyvių nusiteikimas. / The major purpose of this dissertation was to measure quality of preselected public discussions (in form of comments) generated on popular online social network Facebook. We used Discourse Quality Index as the main instrument to collect and analyze our empirical data. In particular, we measured how the quality of our discussions corresponded to the preconditions of Habermasian ideal discourse perception. In our analysis, we highlighted the role of Web 2.0 based online communications environments to support, promote or, possibly, neglect traditions and principles of deliberative democracy. Our results revealed that quality of the discussions we analyzed is not good enough; consequently, they cannot be considered by policymakers and have positive impact on decisions made. The main reasons of that are: a) audience polarization; b) dissensual political discourse; c) low participants’ scientific and political literacy; d) not serious or light role that participants undertake in the discourse.

The major purpose of this dissertation was to measure quality of preselected public discussions (in form of comments) generated on popular online social network Facebook. We used Discourse Quality Index as the main instrument to collect and analyze our empirical data. In particular, we measured how the quality of our discussions corresponded to the preconditions of Habermasian ideal discourse perception. In our analysis, we highlighted the role of Web 2.0 based online communications environments to support, promote or, possibly, neglect traditions and principles of deliberative democracy. Our results revealed that quality of the discussions we analyzed is not good enough; consequently, they cannot be considered by policymakers and have positive impact on decisions made. The main reasons of that are: a) audience polarization; b) dissensual political discourse; c) low participants’ scientific and political literacy; d) not serious or light role that participants undertake in the discourse. / Disertacija siekiama įvertinti pasirinkto socialinio tinklo viešojo diskurso potencialą demokratinių procesų palaikymui. Tirtos viešosios klimato kaitos diskusijos (komentarai) socialiniame tinkle Facebook. Empiriniams duomenims surinkti ir apdoroti naudojamas Diskurso kokybės indeksas: įvertinta, kaip analizuojamų komentarų kokybė atitinka idealųjį habermasiškąjį diskurso kokybės supratimą. Analizuojant ir interpretuojant surinktus duomenis, įvertintos Web 2.0 komunikacijos charakteristikos (kaip galimybės ir kliūtys svarstomosios demokratijos procesams palaikyti); taip pat aptarti klimato kaitos moksliniai ir politiniai aspektai (aktualizuojant rizikos komunikacijos ir deliberatyviosios demokratijos teorines prieigas). Tyrimo rezultatai atskleidė, jog analizuotų viešų komentarų kokybė yra nepakankama, kad galėtų daryti konkrečią įtaką politinių sprendimų priėmimo procesuose. Pagrindinės to priežastys: a) auditorijų poliarizacija; b) nesutarimais grįsta politinė diskusija; c) nepakankamas dalyvių mokslinis ir politinis išprusimas; d) nerimtas dalyvių nusiteikimas.

本文旨在探討透過權力分享式民主與審議式民主的取徑，來緩解當前台灣民主困境的可行性。 首先，本文討論了當前台灣民主困境的成因，以及藍綠雙方的根本差異。同時指出，台灣當前的民主困境可被視為一種極度分裂社會的狀態來理解，並將台灣民主困境的關鍵難題，定位在認同差異與政治不信任。 其次，本文從既有的權力分享式民主的文獻中，梳理出有助於解決當前台灣民主困境的「規範性概念」與「經驗性證據」；做為權力分享式民主對當前台灣民主困境的回應。經過分析後發現，利用協合式民主去處理當前台灣民主困境，應是個值得嘗試的方向。若將協合式民主中菁英間的決策模式，改由審議取代議價，則此種修正型的協合式民主可為長期解決族群衝突提供更多的可能性。 繼之，本文從既有的審議式民主的文獻中，梳理出有助於解決當前台灣民主困境的「規範性理念」與「經驗性證據」，作為審議式民主對於當前台灣民主困境的回應。經過分析後發現，理論上，審議式民主的理想審議是可以解決當前台灣民主困境，只不過理想言說情境在現實生活中很難達成。但是這並不排除理想言說情境是可以近似達成的。不過文獻中迄今仍無經驗證據顯示，單獨利用審議式民主可以解決在極度分裂社會中的國家認同問題。為了讓對立雙方願意自由參加對話、願意相互尊重，以及願意理性溝通，必須提供誘因，而權力分享就是一種誘因。此外，為了判斷對話或審議環境是否接近理想言說情境，必須要有量化的測量工具，而話語品質指數(DQI)就是一種工具。因此，權力分享與DQI，就是強化審議式民主的兩種有效工具。 面對當前台灣民主困境，本文最後提出了一個結合協合式民主與審議式民主(即修正型的協合式民主)的現階段策略的建議。 / This thesis explores the feasibility of mitigating ethnic conflict of current Taiwan employing the methods of power-sharing democracy and deliberative democracy. First of all, the causes and the key difficult problems of democratic predicament, and the dispute in national identity between the pan-blue and pan-green camps, as those currently exist in Taiwan, are discussed in greater detail. The key difficult problems appear to be conflict in identities and political distrust. Next, based on the existing literature of power-sharing democracy, this thesis identifies the normative ideas and empirical evidences that are relevant to the settlement of democratic predicament of current Taiwan. After an in depth analysis, it concludes that the use of consociational approach to manage democratic predicament of current Taiwan should be the direction worth trying. The so-called modified consociational democracy, which is formed to meet the deliberative requirements of publicity and reciprocity, by replacing consociational decision making with deliberation, may provide more possibility for longer-term goal of ethnic conflict resolution. Likewise, based on the existing literature of deliberative democracy, this thesis identifies the normative ideas and empirical evidences that are relevant to the settlement of democratic predicament of current Taiwan. After an in depth analysis, it concludes that, theoretically, the use of ideal deliberation approach appears capable of dealing with the democratic predicament of current Taiwan. Although it is not possible to create Habermas’s ideal speech situation on a precise level, it is possible to achieve ISS approximately. However, there did not exist any empirical evidence in the literature to demonstrate that the application of deliberative democracy alone may provide conflict resolution of the national identity problem in deeply divided societies. In order to let both sides of the conflicting groups be willing to participate freely in the dialogue, be willing to respect one another, and be willing to communicate rationally, it is necessarily to provide both sides with power-sharing incentives tailored to make both sides feel absolutely secure. In addition, in order to evaluate how close the dialogue or deliberative approaches the conditions of ideal speech situation, it is necessarily to have a quantitative measuring instrument at our disposal and the discourse quality index (DQI) is such an instrument. Therefore, power-sharing and DQI tend to form two effective tools for strengthening the deliberative democracy. Finally, this thesis proposes the modified consociational democracy as the present stage strategy for the resolution of democratic predicament of current Taiwan.