"Effective shepherding" is synonymous with propaganda, which the study tries to promote. Correct or not, it certainly isn't democratic or can be justified with the alleged protection of democracy.
It is a perspective that has the premise that its influence is more constructive than others. Finding an example here is easy, but it cannot prove the general rule.
For instance, democracy has no place in formalized education. The student is the commodity and entered (and may exit) their arrangement of their own well informed consensual free will.
Beyond this, vigorous debate is nice. Democracy may be as base as appeal to mob appetite. Besides, aren’t democracies themselves contingent upon prosperity, peace, and well disseminated information (or something)? Which are we?
You more rarely get a mobs of educated people so in that education is an important factor for a functioning democratic society.
Otherwise it is a question of force and then you just need to protect your desire to rule against others. In my opinion that would be difficult in an educated society. On the other hand there are more often mobs that try to declare legitimacy of a ruler instead of promoting democracy. So the equation of democracy with mob rules is plainly wrong. Most mobs end in autocracies, and mob rule is more prevalent here as well. It is the result of a very short sighted analysis. A common one, a mob one in my opinion. That should of course be part of the curriculum.
The Paradox of the Internet in Southeast Asia
