Nuscha, you can see from just the length of the paragraphs that this essay is going to be tough going for any reader. The work of drawing someone in to your ideas can be done by many different techniques, but whatever you choose it must add energy to the relationship with the reader at first, not consume it. If the reader is not gaining energy to take on what she is reading, she drops the task.

The long first paragraph rolls on, sentence after sentence, without telling us why we are reading what we are reading. Not only have we no sight of the destination, we also don't have any points of reference in the real world. Every sentence treats abstract entities, which means we can't see clearly even the landmarks we are passing on the way to an undefined destination. And when we finally reach the end of the first paragraph we still don't know what the essay is about, because we're told that everything that follows is an illustration of the subject of the prior sentence which was (I'm not kidding ... you can see for yourself): "A lot of thought." Which, in the passive voice no less, "has been given."

This is not the way to accomplish the act of seizing the reader by the throat and making him see the world through new eyes. Or even gently introducing an idea of profound creative potency. In fact, it won't succeed in keeping readers awake.

The second paragraph, which is 427 words long, jams together points presented by several different writers—the ones acknowledged below, by a breezy general wave at their writings—after which another paragraph tells us that these are just a few of the ideas that are out there "being discussed." They all, to be sure, have something to do with something that can be characterized as "about the collective and individual participation," because pretty much anything can be put in that category somehow. If there is a conclusion, it is that "societies will rather have to make a deliberate decision on how they want to govern the structure and the use of the Internet based on a political concept defining the relationship of the collective and the individual and their respective rights in the online world," which seems to me probably tautological. If it isn't, I don't know what the other idea is that this one isn't.

We need to begin from the idea that is yours, not someone else's. That idea happens in your mind because it's about the world you actually live in, with the other people who actually live there. The Net exists in their lives and yours, and the way it behaves is a powerful force reshaping all sorts of other social practices. Find something you know about that, when interpreted, demonstrates or leads to something interesting. Write down the resulting idea, in a sentence. Then explain the idea, consider some objections you think productive to encounter, and show some implications. In that way, the essay makes possible a thought process for you and also one for the reader.