" Rather than acting as a revolutionary tool rearranging political power and instigating direct democracy, the Internet is destined to become dominated by the same actors in American politics who currently utilize other mediums." (Davis, 5) But how can one argue this point, how can this useful tool not affect democracy to the better? Dahl in his book On Democracy asserts that there are certain conditions and institutions that are necessary in order for a true democracy to be existent and be prosperous. But with the development and evolvement of information communications technologies (ICTs) such as the Internet, these institutions and condition of democracy will become negatively affected. This will occur because the dominant actors of politics of our time will get hold of even more control than they have had before on aspects of political matters and decisions, which in return, deters the public even more from becoming active in political life. Dahl's required institution of having access to Alternative sources of information for having modern representative government and the condition deeply essential for this institution to be true, which is that of Democratic beliefs and political culture, are hindered by the internet because the access of this institution will become even less available than in the past. The institution of Associational autonomy and the condition necessary for it, is weak subcultural pluralism will also be negatively affected because of the internet for the reason that certain factions or groups can become more influential and can impose on others which in return will cause the lessening of the possible chance of encompassing Associational autonomy. .

             "Citizens have a right to seek out alternative and independent sources of information from other citizens, experts, newspapers, magazines, telecommunications, and the like. Moreover, alternative sources of information actually exist that are not under control of the government or any other single political group attempting to influence public political beliefs, and these alternative sources are effectively protected by law.