My experiences with reading foreign theorists and philosophers have almost always been protracted and often frustrating, primarily due to the strong tendency for translators to approach texts in very dry and sometimes convoluted ways, and also in a smaller part due to the fact that the German language has some extraordinarily long words.
Even in small doses such as Laura Mandell's compilation of quotes from Jurgen Habermas, I found this to be the case. As a result this post might be on the short side. Nevertheless, let's dive in...
Habermas' construction of a definition for the "public sphere" is primarily drawn from historical examples of political and upper-class societies. In applying his theories to a more modern mode of discourse, specifically, the internet, we can consider online forums and blogs as modern versions of other arenas for discussion and discourse, such as the courts in bourgeois society. One key difference is that these modern, digital forums allow for almost anyone to participate in discourse. An excellent example of this is The Daily Kos, a highly liberal news aggregation blog, which features lots of contributors and a steady stream of public discussion on each entry. However, on sites that receive high amounts of traffic, daily updates, or host discussion on particularly controversial or publicized issues, such discussion is often moderated. In addition, posters whose political opinions flow against the general stream of discourse are often reviled or banned. While the Daily Kos functions as a news and media site, it also aggregates from other blogs, creating a dense network of cross-reporting. The informal nature of many of the posts and the open nature of the commenting function (in which any viewer can post feedback about an entry) mark a stark change from the historical nature of the public sphere, in which its participants were largely members of the bourgeois and social elite. The subject of discussion, however, has changed little from Habermas' original observations that "public...was synonymous with state-related." Even in their slogan, the blog strives to provide commentary on "the state of the nation". Daily Kos' content is entirely devoted to political and sociopolitical issues. Its intent is for its readers and commenters to discuss political issues and opinions which they have a mutual, vested interest in. This essentially is an exact example of Habermas' true definition of the public sphere: Its purpose is to
"engage them in a debate over the general rules governing relations in the basically privatized but publicly relevant sphere of commodity exchange and social labor" (27).
The key function of the site is not simply to stream news articles at its readers for their edification, but rather to allow them a public forum upon which to discuss them at length. Another unique element of the definition of a public sphere, which also encompasses the Daily Kos, is the way in which public leaders use the sphere as a method of addressing their subjects. The blog has been used invariably as both a platform upon which to campaign to voters, pander to the public, or call political issues to attention. Considering these similarities to Habermas' classical definition of public spheres of the past, the Daily Kos clearly lies within the public sphere, perhaps far more public than ever before given the accessibility of the internet.
No comments:
Post a Comment