Thoughts on Readings 4/15/09

The Public Sphere by Jurgen Habermas

Habermas discusses the historical/sociological formation of a new "bourgeois public sphere" that sprang out of the feudal sovereignty of the high middle ages. He says that in the eighteenth century the concepts of public sphere and public opinion arose for the first time. There was a split at this time whereby society appeared in clear contrast in motivations from those of the states. Similar to the distinction between "public vs. private" that was discussed in Dewey, this new construction created the concept of a collectivist public opinion.

As Habermas notes:

"The bourgeois public sphere could be understood as the sphere of private individuals assembled into a public body, which almost immediately laid claim to the officially regulated 'intellectual newspapers' for use against the public authority itself". (p. 352)

He goes further into the role that the development of a free press had on this. He states:

"The press remained an institution of the public itself, effective in the manner of a mediator and intensifier of public discussion, no longer a mere organ for the spreading of news but not yet the medium of a consumer culture". (p. 353)

Habermas stresses that the freedom of the public sphere was crucially linked to its' separation from the dominant hegemonic structure of both the church and the state. This public resource of information and ideas has collapsed in the face of consumerist culture (again, a common theme which shows itself again here).

The media transformed itself from a place where the public obtained its' ideas to a instrument of political power and a medium for advertisements which bolstered society's consumerist drives.

The Virtual Sphere: The Internet as a Public Sphere by Zizi Papacharissi

The second reading this week (written in 2002) ties directly into the first and examines if the Internet can be seen as the tool to create a new "bourgeois public sphere". As Papacharissi states: "Does cyberspace present a separate alternative to, extend, minimize, or ignore the public sphere"?

The answer is complicated and far from definitive. First, Papacharissi states that cyberspace represents more of a "public space" than a "public sphere" and that the distinction in an important one to make. As a public space, the Internet provides the forum for political and social debate--"a virtual space enhances discussion; a virtual sphere enhances democracy". (p. 380)

I felt that this essay raised a number of interesting questions around the topic without answering any of them. Papacharissi brings in the findings of many disparate scholars (Dewey, Fraser, Tcqueville), all of whom seemed to present different ideas when applied to the topic at hand.

However I have to agree with Papcharissi that having vast amounts of information at one's fingertips does NOT create a perfect situation for a public sphere to take shape. As Papcharissi states:

"At the same time, access to the Internet does not guarantee increased political activity or enlightened political discourse. Moving political discussion to a virtual space excludes those with no access to this space. Moreover, connectivity does not ensure a more representative and robust public sphere". (p.382)

Every member of my family uses the Internet to different degrees and in different ways. I use it almost every day for academic research and communication, my father uses it to shop for accessories for his sail boat, my mother only uses it occasionally for email exchange, and my sister hardly uses it at all. Hardly the environment for a robust new public sphere.