Skip to main content

The Public Sphere as Site of Emancipation and Enlightenment: A Discourse Theoretic Critique of Digital Communication

  • Chapter
Re-Imagining Public Space

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bar-Tura, Asaf. 2010. “Arendt, Habermas and Facebook: Participation and Discourse in Cyber Public Spheres.” Humanities and Technology Review 29 (Fall): 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dean, Jodi. 2009. Democracy and Other Neoliberal Fantasies: Communicative Capitalism and Left Politics. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Druckman, James. 2004. “Political Preference Formation: Competition, Deliberation and the (Ir)relevance of Framing Effects.” American Political Science Review 98: 671–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishkin, James. 2005. “Experimenting with a Democratic Ideal: Deliberative Polling and Public Opinion.” Acta Politica 40 (September): 284–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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).

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, Jürgen. 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 1998. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • —. 2009. Europe: The Faltering Project. Malden, MA: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • —. 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hindman, Matthew. 2009. The Myth of Digital Democracy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kellner, Douglas. 2000. “Habermas, the Public Sphere and Democracy: A Critical Intervention.” In Perspectives on Habermas, edited by Lewis Edwin Hahn. Chicago: Open Court.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, Carl. 1985. The Crisis of Parliamentary Democracy. Cambridge, MA. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Editor information

Diana Boros James M. Glass

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

Publish with us

Policies and ethics