The Internet through blogs, email forums etc gives us the ability to interact with different people around the world, these online groups provides us with a “public sphere.” New media appears is unlike traditional broadcast forms such as the television that encourage “Passive audiences” as we are lead to believe by Michael (Michael Rosman in Lister 193) Television through programs such soaps appear to encourage “unhealthy” (Habermas) practices in society, through their stereotypical representations that they portray. The Internet seems to be refreshing because it offers opportunities to “scrutinize” these stereotypes with others online, hence people are given “expression and empowerment.” Therefore the Internet is a great “public sphere” to debate to with people across a great spectrum. The Internet in the United States make possible to “challenge the existing order of identity politics in the” (Janott, 2004: 261).
It is fair to say that the Internet allows for greater interaction and opinion between people online, in this sense the online world is a “public sphere” available to all. However, online engagement with others online is not at that personal level that you find in face to face interactions. You life is very much "public" but your really identity isn't properly revealed so online can't really be a "public sphere."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
What do you think about online communication between two people that actually know each other (e.g like me and you are doing now). Ovbiously we know each others identity already, so does that enable us to be in a puiblic sphere or do you think we're still limited by not being face to face? x
ReplyDeleteDani, the public sphere isn't about f2f. For Habermas it's a philosophical construction of where 'public opinion' might get formed if it was less a fiction created by the media and more of a real voicing of insightful debate.
ReplyDeletePartly because of this, I'm not sure whether in reality the Inet provides much of a 'public sphere'.. The CMC technology is available, but it's flooded with hyper-specialised niche communication or superficial dross. Have you ever got striking insight about an important social issue from an online forum that didn't employ old media links for the most insight?
I have to say that my experience is that this almost only ever happens in these niche areas, which are marginalised by their very nature?
What do you think?