IndexThe influence of the media in ChinaPolitical participation and communication in ChinaCommunication and political participation in AmericaDisadvantages and advantages of communication and political participation in AmericaConclusionCountries spend millions of dollars in an attempt to enhance and, also, monitor their favorability in international politics. This essay will compare and contrast political participation and political communication in the United States of America and China. Furthermore, try to analyze and use examples to show how new forms of media have influenced both of these countries in their political participation and communication. The growth of channels and the expansion of online sources mean that people can search for information about foreign countries in very different places (Arceneaux & Johnson, 2007). Communism may be a system of political beliefs based on a common good, concerned primarily with correspondence and reasonableness. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay In communism, control is exercised by a group of individuals who choose the course of activity. It is this group of people who choose outdoor activities. These groups of individuals can intrude into the public lives of others. On the other hand, majoritarian government, which also represents equality within society, is administered by a group of chosen individuals. Majority government can be managed by individuals, and chosen agents are expected to fulfill the desires of society. The Influence of Media in China Since 1998, China has become a rapidly growing web market. The number of web clients multiplies every six months. A report distributed by the China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC) revealed that as of December 2005, approximately 111 million Chinese citizens, or 8% of China's population, were Web customers. With the advent of the Web, news reaches users Chinese people from broader sources and people are able to memorize legislative issues, make assumptions and communicate with others in a modern and phenomenal way. It would probably have been simpler to discover the influential effects of the media if most of the external sphere came from the same foreign offices and television administrations, a nation at that point would have been protected in a moderately united way. But nowadays a person who needs to find out information about China can observe daily news, CNN, CCTV or even access Weibo and easily communicate with foreign Chinese citizens. These two changes in the media environment, less overall than remote news and more significant differences in the sources to which people may be exposed, mean that people are likely to see exceptionally distinct amounts and types of content, complicating the ability of analyst to link the introduction to the supposition. Some social issues of great concern to Chinese citizens, especially social misconduct and official debasement, have been rapidly publicized across the Web. Political Participation and Communication in China Two decades ago, some researchers predicted that data innovation would have led to the government of the political participatory majority. government (Masuda 1985). Nowadays this prediction remains generally perfect, indeed in innovatively created social orders. In any case, this is not to cruelly imply that innovation has no role to play in participatory popular government. It could symbolize a turning point in web legislative issues in China when thePresident Hu Jintao appeared on People's Organize (www.people.com.cn) and had a live chat online with web customers on June 20, 2008. In response to questions from Chinese web customers, President Hu said having surfed the net for three important purposes, in particular seeing national and world news; understand the concerns and assumptions of web users; and understand netizens' comments and proposals for the (Chinese Communist) Party and the State. He said that the Chinese government showed enormous tension towards some recommendations and comments posted by web clients, and saw the web as a vital channel for learning people's opinions and pooling people's intelligence. Copying President Hu's activity, First Servant Wen Jiabao started with online live chat on February 28, 2009. Since then, an unused term “wang shang ting zheng” (网上听政 meaning “online audience”, or “ listen to people online”) has become prevalent and popular in China. The Chinese government's intention to promote the democratization of its administration was also spelled out in First Servant Wen Jiaboa's report to the 11th National People's Congress (3rd session) in March 2010. In accordance with WenJiabao, the Chinese government is accelerating making a solid decision – creating, executing and observing the framework; jointly, creating a stable environment for freedom to criticize and monitor the government; and will support the reconnaissance part of the open circle (Wednesday 2010). Can the web accelerate China's political democratization? According to the global urbanization prospects of the united countries, in 2010, the Chinese population accounted for 55.1% of the country's total population (UN 2010). In any case, the voices of this large part were rare on the web. A substantial examination of the scope of online discourse on the Organization of Individuals found that topics related to rural issues accounted for less than 1% in both the top 100 hot topics and National Reinforcement Rally discourses. The online saphony of the rustic society is apparently linked to the inconsistencies of online capacity, as illustrated in the investigation of CNNIC's 24th Web Development Report and in the case of Jintang. Clearly, the country's population, which has fewer online capabilities, is marginalized in terms of interests. So, in reality, the Internet's claim to provide widespread services is fulfilled. Financially destitute and politically weak people are appalled at having to access data and express themselves on the web. Missing Data and America's Political Communication and Technology Participation Political participation is a vital topic in any majority state. Who participates, how, why, and with what impact are all matters of concern to the scholar and the legislator and, most confidently, to the ordinary citizen. Individuals can take part in legislative matters in numerous ways. They can set up their own agent or representative or work for a candidate or political party. They can show up at their neighborhood school board or city hall or call the police to complain about their neighbor's dog. Largely because of the federalist framework, people have numerous opportunities to become interested in popular government at the state and neighborhood levels. Some forms of interest are more common than others, and some citizens care more than others, but almost all have done so. Since the beginning of the 20th century, American voter turnout has been in decline. Fewer than 50 percent of qualified voters polled during the 1996 presidential race. Lower rates are routinely detailed for congressional races, and fewer Americans actually bother to vote for their operatives.quarter. The US positions close the foot of the law-based vanguard countries that measure voter turnout. There are numerous variables that can contribute to voter turnout. Many experts cite the growing distance between voters. The outrages of recent decades have caused negativity that has led to a decline in political interests, especially among the country's young voters. There tends to be a relationship between self-efficacy or the belief that a person can actually have a challenge and a grade. Some viewers accept that declining voter turnout shows that Americans have less say in government. America's popular government empowers its individuals to connect with a political party, work on a campaign, or contribute money to a political cause. More locally, citizens organize activity groups, draft petitions, and send mail to their agents. While American voter turnout is declining, these other avenues of support remain strong. Lower voter turnout in the United States has perplexed lawmakers, activists and academics trying to reverse a trend that places the country behind many of the world's developed countries in cooperation in polls. In Eminent, the Seat Inquire about Center placed the United States 31st out of 35 for voter turnout by voting age, among mostly majority-majority countries that are part of the Organization for Participation and financial development. Fifty-three percent of qualified voters in the United States cast ballots in 2012, the last time a presidential race was held, with nearly 129 million people out of a potential 241 million citizens taking part in the race. In subsequent history, interest in the United States has reached its maximum during presidential races, when in recent decades almost 55-60 percent of qualified voters will vote. But these numbers diverge among non-presidential numbers, which track voting patterns, as 36 percent of registered voters cast ballots during the 2014 decision cycle, the lowest turnout in a common race since 1942, when many of the young of the country they were outside. of the nation engaged in the Second World War. Becker said three out of ten voters took part in the presidential primaries this year. “A smaller and smaller portion of voters are making important choices,” he said. Disadvantages and Advantages of Political Communication and Participation in America The emergence of social media has changed the way political communication occurs in the United States. Political institutions such as politicians, political parties, foundations, institutions and political think tanks all use social media platforms, such as Facebook and Twitter, to communicate and engage with voters. Regular individuals, politicians, “experts,” and thought leaders are able to express their opinions, engage in a broad network, and connect with other like-minded individuals. The active participation of social media users has been an increasingly important element in political communication, especially during political elections in the 2000s. Social media are changing the nature of political communication as they are apparatuses that can be used to enlighten and mobilize customers in other ways. Customers can associate directly with legislators and campaign supervisors and engage in political exercises with better approaches. Each stage of social media, whether Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or Snapchat, has an “advanced design” that impacts how lawmakers and citizens can use social media for political communication. For example, simply by pressing the“Like button” on Facebook or by taking someone's name on Twitter, users have the ability to engage with others and express their opinions in better ways. The ability for customers to immediately share, like or retweet political messages has opened a modern avenue for lawmakers to reach voters. At the same time, social media campaigns can pose dangers that are not shown on conventional stages, such as television or newspaper ads. While the political party controls all the information contained in a television or newspaper advertisement, in a social media campaign, experts and opposing party supporters can immediately post negative comments under the campaign messages have a stage to communicate with, different from that of the standard media. Lawmakers have the ability to raise large sums of money in moderately short periods of time through social media campaigns. In 2012, President Obama raised over a billion dollars for his campaign, breaking the fundraising record. About $690 million was raised through online giving, including social media, email and site giving, and more money was raised from small donors than ever before in recent memory. The 2008 presidential race was the major race in which candidates used the Web and social media as a tool for their campaigns. At that point, President-elect Barack Obama was the first to use the Internet to organize supporters, advertise, and communicate with people in a way that had been outlandish in previous choices. Obama used sites like YouTube to advertise through recordings. Recordings posted to YouTube by Obama have been viewed for 14.5 million hours. With the 2012 decision more candidates were using a broader set of social media stages. Legislators were currently on social organization destinations like Twitter, Instagram, YouTube and other modern social media devices and versatile apps. Some candidates used social media to declare their candidacy. Millions of adherents on Twitter and Romney had 1.2 million. On Facebook, Obama had more than 29 million likes on his page and Romney had 7.9 million. On Instagram, Obama had 1.4 million devotees and Romney had 38,000 devotees. President Obama had more supporters on all of his other social media accounts, including Spotify, Pinterest and YouTube, although research recommends following only Obama or Romney on social media as Facebook may have had little impact on voter behaviors . President Obama also used his social media accounts more than any other candidate online. He actually posted more on Twitter, YouTube, and his individual site blog. President Obama's campaign flourished with online giving in both 2008 and 2012. In 2008, 3.95 million people donated to President Obama's campaign. That number rose to 4.4 million people during his 2012 campaign. The entire online giving also went from $500 million in 2008 to $690 million in 2012. However, the media has its drawbacks too , as in the United States of America. Scandals have been a part of the American political system since its inception (see List of federal political scandals in the United States). Political scandals are events that capture a lot of attention and eventually disappear and are a source of intense public communication. The media has subsequently played an important role in both the dissemination of these stories and the coverage they receive. Scandals linked to the Internet and social media have increased in recent decades.