Digital citizenship

In a proclamation on the 50th anniversary of the 26th Amendment, the White House acknowledged that in 1971, the U.S. voting age was lowered from 21 to 18, because young people were “fulfilling their civic duties.” They were paying taxes, serving in the military, working in various sectors of the economy, and pursuing higher education. In essence, they were doing everything expected of an engaged citizen—except voting.

To me, the peculiar phrasing of ‘fulfilling their civic duties’ raises an important question: is the right to vote earned through civic engagement even though it is itself an expression of civic engagement? If the answer is yes, and we are to tie the right to vote directly to the performance of civic duties, we must ask: what qualifies as ‘enough’ engagement?

In 1971, civic duties were arguably more tangible than they are now. Today’s interconnected world has expanded the concept of civic engagement to include online activism, consuming and sharing political information on social media, and participation in online forums. While these digital activities are perhaps less significant than many traditional in-person roles, like being a first responder or law enforcement officer, they still reflect meaningful forms of civic engagement.

Half a century since the U.S. government gave voting rights to young people, where an 18-year-old can influence millions through a smartphone, it’s beyond time to broaden our criteria for “civic duties” to recognize new forms of citizneship in the digital space. In recent years, leading thinkers and organizations such as Mike Ribble, Karen Mossberger, and the Digital Citizenship Institute have deepened our understanding of how digital engagement intersects with traditional civic life. Though their perspectives vary, they all converge on one essential truth: what we do online matters.