Social Media, Political Participation and Democratic Governance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.68740/jjss12Keywords:
comparative politics, youth engagement;, democratic governance;, social media, political participationAbstract
Social media platforms have become central infrastructures of public communication, altering how citizens obtain political information, express preferences, mobilize, and evaluate democratic institutions. This article synthesizes peer-reviewed research and institutional evidence on the relationship between social media, political participation, and democratic governance. Drawing on meta-analyses, cross-national surveys, systematic reviews, and governance reports published principally between 2012 and 2026, it treats social media neither as an inherently democratizing technology nor as an inherently corrosive one. Instead, it examines how platform affordances interact with political institutions, media systems, age cohorts, and regulatory environments. The evidence indicates a consistent, modestly positive association between political uses of social media and several forms of civic and political participation, including information seeking, expression, petitioning, and protest coordination. These associations are often stronger in emerging democracies and among younger citizens. At the same time, research documents risks that are more pronounced in established democracies, including affective polarization, declining institutional trust, information disorder, and the commercial amplification of emotionally charged content. Comparative analysis of the United States, Estonia, Brazil, Kenya, and India illustrates that outcomes depend less on platform presence alone than on internet freedom, media pluralism, state capacity, and civic literacy. The article concludes that democratic quality in digital public spheres is a governance problem as much as a technology problem. Policy responses that combine transparency, media and information literacy, independent journalism, and rights-respecting platform accountability are more consistent with available evidence than either unrestricted platform exceptionalism or indiscriminate speech restriction.