Habermas Theory

The public sphere is an area in social life where individuals can come together to freely discuss and identify societal problems, and through that discussion influence political action. It is "a discursive space in which individuals and groups congregate to discuss matters of mutual interest and, where possible, to reach a common judgement”. The public sphere can be seen as "a theatre in modern societies in which political participation is enacted through the medium of talk" and a "realm of social life in which public opinion can be formed”. The study of the public sphere centres on the idea of participatory democracy, and how public opinion becomes political action. The basic belief in public sphere theory is that political action is steered by the public sphere, and that the only legitimate governments are those that listen to the public sphere.

Habermas stipulates that, due to specific historical circumstances, a new civic society emerged in the Eighteenth century. Driven by a need for open commercial arenas where news and matters of common concern could be freely exchanged and discussed - accompanied by growing rates of literacy, accessibility to literature, and a new kind of critical journalism - a separate domain from ruling authorities started to evolve across Europe.

 

The public sphere was well established in various locations including coffee shops and salons, areas of society where various people could gather and discuss matters that concerned them. The coffee houses in London society at this time became the centres of art and literary criticism, which gradually widened to include even the economic and the political disputes as matters of discussion.

 

As Habermas argues, in due course, this sphere of rational and universalistic politics, free from both the economy and the state, was destroyed by the same forces that initially established it. The growth of capitalistic economy led to an uneven distribution of wealth, thus widening the economic polarity. This results in limiting access to the public sphere and the political control of the public sphere was inevitable for the modern capitalistic forces to operate and thrive in the competitive economy.

According to Habermas, a variety of factors resulted in the eventual decay of the public sphere, including the growth of a commercial mass media, which turned the critical public into a passive consumer public; and the welfare state, which merged the state with society so thoroughly that the public sphere was squeezed out. It also turned the "public sphere" into a site of self-interested contestation for the resources of the state rather than a space for development of a public-minded rational consensus.


Main Quotes

“By the ‘public sphere’ we mean first of all the realm of our social life in which something approaching public opinion can be formed,” writes Habermas. “Citizens behave as a public body when they confer in an unrestricted fashion – that is, with the guarantee of freedom of assembly and association and the freedom to express and publish their opinions– about matters of general interest.”

“This publishes of representation was not constituted as a social realm, that is, a sphere; rather, it was something like a status attribute, if this term may be permitted.”

“The world has grown too complex for this barely concealed unilateralism.” - 
Habermas

“I do think it is very important not to forget that society is not only depending on technologies and the knowledge feeding into new technology in society, is depending on a proper continuation and

reconstruction of its own connections.”

“ In its clash with the arcane and bureaucratic practices of the absolutist state, the emergent bourgeoisie gradually replaced a public sphere in which the ruler’s power was merely represented before the people with a sphere in which state authority was publicly monitored through informed and critical discourse by the people"

Applying his theories to we-media

·         He advocates free speech and creative discussion to create political change. This can be related to Kony 2012, who used a video to try and create change in Uganda.

·         ‘Occupy Southend’ – people campaigning outside the Odeon; example of people working together for change through collaborative discussion.

·         ‘Ding Dong the Witch is Dead’ à People coming together for a common cause. Although arguably, this wasn’t effective.

·         Arab Springs ‘accelerated communication opens up entirely new possibilities for organizing activities and for large-scale political mobilizations of widely dispersed addressees.’ – People communicating quickly through Twitter to bring about an uprising.

 

David Gauntlett- Web 2.0

David Gauntlett is a British sociologist and media theorist. He specializes in studying contemporary media audiences, the every making and sharing of digital media, and the role of such media in self-identity and self-expression. Web 2.0 has enabled all kinds of people to be creative, to share the products they've made, to collaborate with others and be producers as well as consumers.

Background information

• Gauntlett graduated from the University Of York in Sociology in 1992
• In 2006 he joined the School of Media, Arts and Design as a Professor of Media and Communications
• He focused on the way digital media is changing the experience of media in general.

Media Studies 2.0

• Gauntlett published 'Media Studies 2.0' online in 2007, which argues that classic media studies fails to define when the categories of 'audiences' and 'producers' unit, and that new, altered teaching methods are needed.

• He states that because of web 2.0, we, as audiences, can become our own producers. Websites such as YouTube have allowed us to do this. Through this we can create our own identity and even influence other peoples.

• Through this, gender identity for example, has become less constricted to previous representations. Web 2.0 allows us to create our own unique identity that doesn't necessarily follow traditional understandings of gender. The ability and freedom that web 2.0's allowed means it is not far more acceptable to be different and accepted for our individuality.

• A proposition to rework audience studies was put forward by Gauntlett in 2008. This argues that audiences change to become more so active than passive towards media. These ideas are developed further in 'Making is Connecting'.

• It is almost impossible to tell how an audience is going to react to a particular media product. This may change how the particular product is done. A product might evolve into something more similar to a different media product that has already had a great reaction from the audience viewing it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PFIXcDyKUOk

• Media 2.0 focuses on everyday meaning produced by the diverse array of audience members

• The concept of Web 2.0 blew up in 2005 after Tim O'Reilly wrote a brilliant article on the subject and published it on the web.

• This was before the most well-known Web 2.0 platforms had really taken off. But lately there has been a lot of criticism about the Web 2.0 giants. Facebook has seen its stock price cut in half. Twitter and other social media platforms have come under recent criticisms as well.
• The core parts of Web 2.0, according to Martin Kelly are the following:

1. Relying on "hard to recreate" content pieces that "get richer as more people use them".

2. "Trusting users as co-developers".

3. "Utilitizng the knowledge of the group and collective".

4. "Leveraging the long tail through customer self-service".

5. Focus on providing services, not a piece of software, and remaining cost-effective.

• These five core concepts are still highly relevant to any Web 2.0 platform today. Even with recent downturns on the stock market or elsewhere, the biggest tech giants today like Google, Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Twitter, and a few others all adhere to these principles.

I agree with David Gauntlett that individuals can now be consumers as well as producers. In relation to my documentary on the Brighton Marathon, many runners have blogged and filmed their journey in the training process and the run up to the marathon. This has helped other hopeful runners learn what is involved and informs them with training tips.