essay_outline.docx[Type text] [Type text] [Type text]
NO
TUTOR
MAS105-
SEMESTER 2 2013
ESSAY OUTLINE Due Date: 26th August
Weight: 15%
Name & No
QUESTION 8: “The idea of a public sphere to which everyone can contribute on equal term is simply a fantasy”. Critically discuss this claim. Your essay should include reference to the Turnbull and Howley articles
· Going to discuss this question outlining its positives and negatives, however overall have an optimistic tone as I disagree with this statement, and believe its not just an “idea” and it does happen
· The Internet has become a platform for the development of online communities and cyber sub groups whom utilize the Internet to share interaction with like-minded individuals. The public sphere, a census of public opinion does not necessarily limit itself to discussions of a political nature. It is within this paradigm that the recent popularity of social media may be interpreted as other expressions of the public sphere, and their attempt to create new ways of engagement and communication with each other. However even if it doesn’t completely satisfy these criteria, it still conforms to Habermas definition of being a forum accessible to all, where ideas can be exchanged. The public sphere shaped by the internet is different to any ever before, in that this public sphere is undefined by geography or any single demographic but rather a collective system of users who are linked instantaneously around the world by a series of computers and the thread of cyberspace they share.
· Look into a case study where the public sphere is seen to be present (asylum seekers, animal cruelty etc.) and how we see it present through various media platforms e.g. Facebook, blogs, subscription emails.
· Discuss the idea of imagined communities
-"Imagined communities" is a concept coined by Benedict Anderson. He believes that a nation is a community socially constructed, imagined by the people who perceive themselves as part of that group.
- Imagined communities does exist so in turn this contribution to the public sphere isn’t merely a fragment of fantasy in our imagination and minds but a real world establishment
· The pubic sphere model- the public sphere model suggests that the needs of society cannot be met entirely through the market system. The market behaves quite differently from the democratic ideal of “one person one vote”, this is due to the power consumers hold in regards to purchases in the market. In addition the public sphere model argues that there are some societal needs that simply cannot be met via the markets supply and demand dynamic,
· German sociologist Jurgen Habermas ‘The structural transformation of the Public Sphere’ Habermas defines the public sphere as a “realm of our social life in something approaching public opinion can be formed [where] access is guaranteed to all citizens (Habermas, 1989, pg 102”).
· Through public interest public sphere is possible
· Look into Ien Ang- The audience is perceived as a public, who, according to Ien Ang, should be “reformed, educated, informed as well as entertained- in short, ‘served’- presumable to enable them to better perform their democratic rights and duties”
· The statement is somewhere true due to human ego and societies that hold different ethnic, religious and cultural diversity, partisan politics and economic stratification (K. Howley, 2007)
– in order to identify and work towards issues of common concern, private individuals must abandon their self- interest and ignore or ‘bracket ‘differences in socio-economic status and life history (K. Howley, 2007)
- rather there is the existence of multiple, overlapping public spheres that provide different groups with the material and symbolic resources to forge common identify and articulate their particular interests, perspectives and concerns (Fraser, 1992; Meadows, 2005)
· There is one over-riding public sphere however within that are imagined communities
· Many people would argue that there is not one public sphere, but many (Hartley 1996, McKee 2005)
· Gustave le Bon (1960) ‘The Crowd’ “Crowds being only capable of thinking in images are only to be impressed by images. It is only images that attract them and become motives for action… Nothing has a greater effect on the imagination of crowds than theatrical representations… sometimes the sentiments suggested the images are so
strong that they tend, like habitual suggestion to transfer themselves into acts”. (Le Bon 1960, p 69)
– if the audience might once have been imagined in terms of a set
discrete categories as defined by their demographic characteristics, now it would seem they may well be imagined in terms of more idiosyncratic and person media habits (S. Turnball, 2006)
- it is now accepted that the activity of reading, listening or watching involves a high complex set of sense- making procedures which largely depend on an individuals social experience and cultural competence (S. Turnball, 2006)
- Everything is done through media platforms, this poses problems for people who do not have access to these various types of social media, thus limiting the public sphere to people whom only hold access.
· However even if it doesn’t completely satisfy these criteria, it still conforms to Habermas definition of being a forum accessible to all, where ideas can be exchanged. The public sphere shaped by the internet is different to any ever before, in that this public sphere is undefined by geography or any single demographic but rather a
collective system of users who are linked instantaneously around the world by a series of computers and the thread of cyberspace they share.
Referencing
Habermas, Jürgen (German(1962)English Translation 1989), The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, Thomas Burger, Cambridge Massachusetts: The MIT Press, p. 30, ISBN 0-262-58108-6
Anderson, Benedict R. O'G. (1991). Imagined communities: reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism (Revised and extended. ed.). London: Verso. p. 224. ISBN 978-0-86091-546-1.
Habermas, Jurgen. (1989). The Public Sphere: An Encyclopaedia Article. In Critical Theory and Society: A Reader. Stephen Eric Bronner and Douglas M Kellner. New York: Routledge. pp 136-142. reproduced in Media and Cultural Studies: key works. Meenakshi Gigi Durham and Douglas M Kellner (ed). (2001) Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. pp102-107.
Fraser, N. (1992) ‘Rethinking the Public Sphere: A Contribution to the Critique of Actually Existing Democracy’ in C. Calhoun (ed.) Habermas and the Public Sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Pg. 109-42
Howley, K. (2005) Community Media: People, Places, and Communication Technologies. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Meadows, M. (2005) ‘Journalism and Indigenoud Public Spheres’, Pacific Journalism Review 11(1): 36-41
Ang, Ien (1991) Desperately seeking the audience. London: Routledge
Ang, Ien (1996) Living Room Wars: Rethinking Media audiences for a postmodern world. London: Routledge
Croteau, David and Hoynes, William (2005) The bueiness of Media: Corporate Media and the Public Interest, Pinge Forge Press, Thousand Oaks, pp. 15-40
Howley, Kevin (2007) “Community Media and the Public Sphere: from Devereux, Eoin (ed) Media Studies: Key Issues and Debates, Los Angeles, Sage, pp. 342-360
7
