Let technology explore what the voters really want - FT中文网
登录×
电子邮件/用户名
密码
记住我
请输入邮箱和密码进行绑定操作:
请输入手机号码,通过短信验证(目前仅支持中国大陆地区的手机号):
请您阅读我们的用户注册协议隐私权保护政策,点击下方按钮即视为您接受。
FT商学院

Let technology explore what the voters really want

New insights into motivation and strength of feeling could help democracy work better
00:00

{"text":[[{"start":7.24,"text":"The writer is author of the forthcoming book ‘The Majority Myth — How Voting Really Works’"}],[{"start":13.43,"text":"It is one of the oddities of public life in western democracies that, despite decades of digital transformation, the way we vote remains fundamentally untouched. Technology has been added but unimaginatively: electronic voting machines and online ballots simply facilitate the same system. The ballot box is treated as if it were a sacred relic, yet our voting customs are not so old. "}],[{"start":42.97,"text":"The secret ballot was introduced in the UK in 1872 to prevent landlords from intimidating tenants — as with other voting rules, it was a practical fix, not a constitutional ideal. The problems have changed and technology now affords opportunities for voting that the architects of our election systems could never have imagined. "}],[{"start":67.32,"text":"One of the weaknesses of modern elections is the lack of information transmitted by the outcomes. Voting produces a result but does not guide the winner. Contrary to the phrase “the people have spoken”, the electorate emits more of a monosyllable — approval or rejection. For a contrast, think of the US Supreme Court, where the votes include an opinion and a summary of the justices’ thinking, enabling those who apply the decision to understand what was intended. "}],[{"start":96.97,"text":"With AI now able to aggregate patterns of reasoning, an anonymised national rationale for the support for parties and how it affected an electoral outcome could be created — it would be a resource to refer to when politicians claim to know what voters elected them to do. "}],[{"start":116.61,"text":"One promising system is range voting, which lets citizens express not just a preference but its strength. A generation ago this would have been impossible; today, it could run on any standard digital interface. Edward Saperia, dean of the London College of Political Technology, points out that such systems rarely change who wins but they can improve the tone of politics. Theatrical populism would be held in check by a genuine map of public feeling that shows which proposals enjoy support and why."}],[{"start":151.46,"text":"Other methods go further. So-called deep voting invites electors to digitally rate why they support or dislike policy choices and how intensely. Technically simple yet politically powerful, it would allow governments to see the contours of their mandate: “We elect you for your housing policy, spare us your culture wars,” for example. The people would be heard, and they could add footnotes. "}],[{"start":178.94,"text":"Even the sensitive question of voter qualification could be approached constructively. We rightly fear any restriction of the right to vote based on wealth or education. But technologically enabled weighting — for example, giving more emphasis to parents on questions to do with children — might be helpful, though it would need strict safeguards to remain fair and transparent."}],[{"start":203.47,"text":"Technology could also expand who has access to power. Citizen juries (voluntary panels, drawn at random from the voting population or from people with relevant knowledge or experience) are now feasible at large scale — containing perhaps as many as 300,000 people."}],[{"start":224,"text":"The idea that a simple majority can capture what the nation wants was exposed as fantasy with the binary choice of the UK’s 2016 Brexit referendum. If democratic procedures are part of national infrastructure, they deserve the same scrutiny and reform as railways, schools and the rest of our public services."}],[{"start":247.48,"text":"What is missing is the courage to admit that democracy has already been captured by tech. Digital networks shape what voters see, believe and discuss. Our typical response — to scold citizens into “resilience” against misinformation — displays wishful thinking. Don’t lecture the voters or denounce the tech, use it for a practical modernisation to improve democracy."}],[{"start":282.17,"text":""}]],"url":"https://audio.ftcn.net.cn/album/a_1775458791_8168.mp3"}

版权声明:本文版权归FT中文网所有,未经允许任何单位或个人不得转载,复制或以任何其他方式使用本文全部或部分,侵权必究。

一周新闻小测:2026年7月11日

您对本周的全球重大新闻了解如何?来做个小测试吧!

为何AI有望清理金融“污泥”

监管机构希望在精简繁琐审批程序的努力中利用这项科技。

极端天气风险上升之际,中国严阵以待迎战连续台风

创纪录的暴雨、龙卷风和山体滑坡重创南部地区,洪水还冲出眼镜蛇和动物园里的动物。

希音获中国批准启动久候的IPO

在历经多年拖延后,中国证券监管机构已批准这家快时尚零售商在香港上市。

苹果起诉OpenAI,指控其窃取最高机密信息

这起诉讼标志着两大硅谷巨头关系破裂。

古典学家艾米莉•威尔逊:奥德修斯是另一种类型的骗子

这位备受赞誉的译者为克里斯托弗•诺兰探讨荷马史诗“回响”的新片提供了灵感,也谈到唐纳德•特朗普最像哪一位希腊英雄。
设置字号×
最小
较小
默认
较大
最大
分享×