
In their article Counterhegemonic Discourses and the Internet, Warf and Grimes focus on the power of the Internet (Big I) to produce counterhegemonic discourses right along side the well-known , and often ignored, hegemonic discourse. Arguing that by sheer size and reach the Internet, though often not commonly viewed as, is a tool of the educated and powerful. They actually put together some convincing numbers to back up their case. “Access to the skills, equipment, and software necessary to gain entree to the electronic highway threatens to create a large-predominantly minority-underclass that is substantially disenfranchised from the benefits of cyberspace” (262). Their numbers however are about 15 years old, and thus should be subject to a bit of well-earned scrutiny.
That aside, they also posit that the Internet can and does still work for the good of the traditionally disenfranchised. “The Internet can also sustain counterhegemonic discourses, challenging established systems of domination and legitimating and publicizing political claims by the powerless and marginalized” (260). This is because the “(i)increasingly easy access to e-mail and the World Wide Web allows many politically disenfranchised groups to communicate with like-minded or sympathetic audiences, publicizing causes often overlooked by the mainstream media and offering perspectives frequently stifled by the conservative corporate ownership of newspapers, television, and other media outlets” (260). Jump to 15 years later and add even greater cyberspace access through social media and blogs.
But Warf and Grimes are quick to point out that this access serves both progressive and conservative groups. “Counterhegemonic is anything but synonymous with progressive: Right-wing groups have harnessed the Internet as readily as anyone on the political left…” (260). So if all sides benefit equally who wins and who loses?
“The Internet obviously does not guarantee the emergence of counter hegemonic discourses, but it does facilitate the opening of discursive spaces within which they may be formulated and conveyed” (270).
Works Cited
Warf, Barney and John Grimes. (1997). Counterhegemonic Discourses and the Internet. Geographical Review, 87, 259-274.
