Computer-Mediated Communication and The Public Sphere: A Critical Analysis

Abstract

In recent times much has been said about the possibility that the two‐way, decentralized communications of cyberspace can provide sites of rational‐critical discourse autonomous from state and economic interests and thus extending the public sphere at large. In this paper the extent to which the Internet does in fact enhance the public sphere is evaluated. Online deliberative practices are compared with a normative model of the public sphere developed from the work of Jürgen Habermas. The evaluation proceeds at a general level, drawing upon more specific Internet research to provide a broad understanding of the democratic possibilities and limitations of the present Internet. The analysis shows that vibrant exchange of positions and rational critique does take place within many online fora. However, there are a number of factors limiting the expansion of the public sphere online. These factors include the increasing colonization of cyberspace by state and corporate interests, a deficit of reflexivity, a lack of respectful listening to others, the difficulty of verifying identity claims and information put forward, the exclusion of many from online political fora, and the domination of discourse by certain individuals and groups. The article concludes by calling for more focused Internet‐democracy research to address these problems further, research for which the present paper provides a starting point.

Sanal dünyaların müzakere potansiyeli: “Second Life” örneği

“…A common view in online communication (Dahlberg, 2001;Shedletsky & Aitken, 2004:108;Witschge, 2005:115) is that impolite and uncivil behaviors are seen easily in online places because of anonymity and telepresence. Users in MUVE interact via their 3D graphical representations (avatars shaped as anything human or creatures, etc.)…”

“…All these kinds of benefits and problems have caused efforts to understand potentials of the online discussions for deliberative model. Studies on online deliberation (Dahlberg, 2001;Graham, 2008;Jankowski & van Os, 2004;Janssen & Kies, 2004;Jensen, 2003;Schneider, 1997;Steenbergen, Bächtiger, Spörndli and Steiner, 2003;Stromer-Galley, 2007;Wilhelm, 2002) mostly focus on quality of discussions. These studies evaluate online discussions in the light of normative criteria of Habermas and for this, deliberative preconditions are conceptualized and various expansions with regards to specific nature of online environments are also included.…”

Participation and deliberation: a case study of readers’ comments to news stories on the Brazilian presidential campaign

“…Several studies argue, furthermore, that some factors may operate as obstacles to the expansion of the online public sphere (Dahlberg, 2001: 1), suggesting that, "what is technologically possible may not be socially favourable" (Rasmussen, 2008: 75). Diverse authors have argued that political discussions in online discursive environments are known for their fragmentation (Morais, 2011: 225-226), as they are dominated by few participants (Strandberg, 2008: 82, Ferreira, 2010bGomes, 2005: 221).…”

“…In fact, analysis categories like justification, complexity (namely, the existence of disparate or contrasting ideas), civility (which indicates a respectful or tolerant attitude in relation to the democratic system, other social groups and other points of view) and politeness (cooperation, expression of agreement, avoidance of disagreement) are among those that were used the least in our corpus. A substantial use of impoliteness was also observed in some comments, which raises issues related to tolerance, as a demonstration of respect for the reasons and perspectives of the others, which is a precondition for deliberation (Bohman, 2003: 93;Dahlberg, 2001). …”

Online-Kommunikation und politische Öffentlichkeit

“…Diese Potenziale des Internets auf Basis von Öffentlichkeitstheorien sind in der Literatur bereits früh beschrieben (Scherer 1998) und durchaus auch kontrovers diskutiert worden (Beck 2006;Dahlberg 2001 Die meisten Studien beschränken sich auf die Ermittlung der Nutzung des Internets für Informationszwecke. ,Nutzung' bedeutet jedoch für online-basierte Kommunikation -im Gegensatz zum klassischen Nutzungsbegriff im Rahmen der Massenkommunikationsforschung -nicht alleine (1) die mehr oder weniger passive Rezeption von Medienangeboten, sondern auch (2) aktiven Einsatz von Online-Medien zur Kontaktaufnahme und Kommunikation mit Anderen in dyadischen Beziehungen und in Kleingruppen sowie zur (3) im engeren Sinne öffentlichen', sprich (potenziell) öffentlich sichtbaren politischen Äußerung und zur politischen Partizipation über Online-Medien (Emmer 2005: 79-81).…”