Abstract
Habermas claims that an inclusive public sphere is the only deliberative forum for generating public opinion that satisfies the epistemic and normative conditions underlying legitimate decision making. He adds that digital technologies and other mass media need not undermine—but can extend—rational deliberation when properly instituted. This paper draws from social epistemology and technology studies to demonstrate the epistemic and normative limitations of this extension. We argue that current online communication structures fall short of satisfying the required epistemic and normative conditions. Furthermore, the extent to which Internet-based communications contribute to legitimate democratic opinion and will formation depends on the design of the technologies in question.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Adorno, Theodor W. 1991. “The Culture Industry Reconsidered.” In The Culture Industry: Selected Essays on Mass Culture. London: Routledge.
Bar-Tura, Asaf. 2010. “Arendt, Habermas and Facebook: Participation and Discourse in Cyber Public Spheres.” Humanities and Technology Review 29 (Fall): 1–25.
Coleman, Stephen, and Vincent Price. 2012. “Democracy, Distance, and Reach: The New Media Landscape.” In Connecting Democracy: Online Consultation and the Flow of Political Communication, edited by Stephen Coleman and Peter M. Shane, 23–43. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Dean, Jodi. 2009. Democracy and Other Neoliberal Fantasies: Communicative Capitalism and Left Politics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Donaldson, Stewart I., and Elisa J. Grant-Vallone. 2002. “Understanding Self-Report Bias in Organizational Behavioral Research.” Journal of Business and Psychology 17, no. 2: 245–260.
Druckman, James. 2004. “Political Preference Formation: Competition, Deliberation and the (Ir)relevance of Framing Effects.” American Political Science Review 98: 671–686.
Fishkin, James. 2005. “Experimenting with a Democratic Ideal: Deliberative Polling and Public Opinion.” Acta Politica 40 (September): 284–298.
Grossman, Lev. 2010. “Time’s Person of the Year: You.” Time, December 13, 2006. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1569514,00.htm1 (December 14, 2010).
Habermas, Jürgen. 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
—. 1998. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
—. 2009. Europe: The Faltering Project. Malden, MA: Polity Press.
Hargittai, Eszter. 2007. “Whose Space? Differences among Users and Non-Users of Social Network Sites.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 13, no. 1 (October): 276–297.
—. 2010. “Digital Na(t)ives? Variation in Internet Skills and Users among Members of the ‘Net Generation.”’ Sociological Inquiry 80, no. 1 (February): 92–113.
Hargittai, Eszter, and Yu-li P. Hsieh. 2010. “Predictors and Consequences of Differentiated Practices on Social Network Sites.” Information, Communication & Society 13, no. 4: 515–536.
Hindman, Matthew. 2009. The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Kellner, Douglas. 2000. “Habermas, the Public Sphere and Democracy: A Critical Intervention.” In Perspectives on Habermas, edited by Lewis Edwin Hahn. Chicago: Open Court.
Lamb, Jason M. 2013. “The Digital Divide: Free Expression, Technology and a Fair Democracy.” March 20. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2245072 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2245072.
Monnoyer-Smith, Laurence. 2012. “The Technological Dimension of Deliberation: A Comparison between Online and Offline Participation.” In Connecting Democracy: Online Consultation and the Flow of Political Communication, edited by Stephen Coleman and Peter M. Shane. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Neblo, Michael. 2007. “Change for the Better? Linking the Mechanisms of Deliberative Opinion Change to Normative Theory.” In Common Voices: The Problems and Promise of a Deliberative Democracy. Available online at http://polisci.osu.edu/faculty/mneblo/papers/ChangeC4.pdf.
Schmitt, Carl. 1985. The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy. Cambridge, MA. MIT Press.
Editor information
Copyright information
© 2014 Diana Boros and James M. Glass
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ingram, D., Bar-Tura, A. (2014). The Public Sphere as Site of Emancipation and Enlightenment: A Discourse Theoretic Critique of Digital Communication. In: Boros, D., Glass, J.M. (eds) Re-Imagining Public Space. Palgrave Macmillan, New York. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137373311_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137373311_4
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, New York
Print ISBN: 978-1-349-48052-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-37331-1
eBook Packages: Palgrave Political Science CollectionPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)