Chapter26

=Chapter 26: The Virtual Sphere= by Zizi Papacharissi

toc

Introduction
- Further democratization of post-industrial society is promised by the utopian rhetoric surrounding new media technologies

· New technologies provide resources that may help extend the role of the public in the social and political area

· Supporters of cyberspace assure that online communication will increase political participation and pave the way for a democratic utopia

· Question: Will the Internet and its surrounding technologies truly revolutionize the political sphere or will they be adapted to the current status quo?

The public sphere
· The idea of ‘the public’ is closely tied to democratic ideals that call for citizen participation in public affairs

· Participation in public affairs contributed significantly to an individual’s sense of existence and self-respect

· The term ‘public’ connotes ideas of citizenship, commonality, and things not private, but accessible and observable by all

· Cyberspace is promoted as a ‘new public space’ made by people and ‘conjoining traditional mythic narratives of progress with strong modern impulses toward self-fulfillment and personal development’

· As a public space, the Internet provides a discussion for political thoughts

· As a public sphere, the Internet assist in discussions that promotes a democratic exchange of ideas and opinions

· A virtual space enhances discussion; a virtual sphere enhances democracy


 * Habermas** saw the public sphere as a domain of our social life in which public opinion could be formed out of rational public debate

Critics of Habermas' theory:

Lyotard – disorder, individuality, and disagreement, rather than rational agreement, lead to true democratic liberation

Fraser – the concept of Habermas’ public sphere functioned merely as a realm for privileged men to practice their skills of governance since it excluded women and non-propertied classes

Carey – privatizing forces of capitalism have created a mass commercial culture that has replaced the public sphere

· Citizen activism is promoted by the fast and cheap access to information provided by the Internet

· The Internet brings people together and help overcome geographical and other boundaries

· Online discussions may erase or further economic inequalities

Information access
· Research has shown that for people who have access to computers, the Internet is a valuable resource for political participation but does not guarantee an increase in political activity or discussions

· Internet users are able to find voting records of representatives, track congressional and Supreme Court rulings, join special interest groups, fight for consumer rights, and plug into free government services

· The Internet provides public space for political discussions but does not constitute a public sphere

· Advantages of online communication:
 * it affords a place for personal expression
 * makes it possible for little-known individuals and groups to reach out to citizens and restructure public affairs
 * connects the government to citizens
 * fast, easy, cheap, and convenient
 * Information on the Internet has not been tampered with or altered to serve particular interests

· Disadvantage of online communication: do not guarantee a fair, representative, and egalitarian public sphere

· The virtual sphere is politically divided in a manner that echoes traditional politics, thus serving as a space for additional expression rather than reforming political thought and structure

· Encouraging fact: at least people are talking about politics and protesting virtually online against democratic governments

Globalization or tribalization?
· Much enthusiasm regarding the future of the Internet as a public sphere results from its ability to connect people from different backgrounds and provide a forum for political discussions

· Geographic boundaries can be overcome and ‘diasporic utopias’ can flourish

· Anonymity online assists one to overcome identity boundaries and communicate more freely which results in exchanges of ideas yet keeps us from assessing the impact and social value of our words

· Hill and Hughes stressed that the technological potential for global communication does not ensure that people from diverse ethnicities will be more understanding of each other, although when the discussion wad focused on political issues, instead of general, it tended to be more toned down

· Political expression online may give people a false sense of empowerment, which misrepresents the true impact of their opinions

Commercialization
· For a vast majority of corporations, the Internet is viewed as another mass enterprise

· Barrett states that in order to make profit, various communication technologies have destroyed one barrier after another, starting with volume, moving to mass, and finally space

· McChesney states that the Internet will open the door to a cultural and political new beginning, even though large corporations will take up a large part of it to launch their online businesses

· Question: How do we recreate something online, when it never really existed offline?

The virtual sphere
· Cyberspace is public and private space and provides new terrain between personal and collective identity; the individual and community

· Hill and Hughes states that people will mold the Internet to fit traditional politics

· It is the balance between utopian and dystopian ideas that reveals the true nature of the Internet as a public sphere

· Real life social relations hinders the creation of a public sphere in the virtual world as much as it does in the real world

· This virtual sphere is dominated by bourgeois computer holders and consists of several spheres of counterpublics that have been excluded frommainstream political discussions yet employ virtual communication to restructure the mainstream that got rid of them

· Breslow argues that the internet promotes a sense of sociality but doesn’t mean it will transform to solidarity

· Social and physical solidarity is what made political and social change over the course of the century and the internet’s anonymity and lack of spatiality and density may actually hinder solidarity

· Cheap, fast, and convenient access to more information does not necessarily mean all citizens are more informed, or more willing to participate inpolitical discussions

· Greater participation in political discourse helps but does not result in healthier democracy

· New technologies facilitate greater, but not necessarily more diverse, participation in political discourse since it’s only available to a small fraction ofthe population

· Group of ‘netizens’ are brought together by common interests who will debate and maybe attempt cultural goals

· The virtual sphere
 * exists in the tradition of the public sphere
 * the value of it lies in the fact that it encompasses the hope, speculation and dreams of what could be
 * it reflects the dynamics of new social movements that struggle on a cultural, rather than a traditionally political terrain
 * it is a vision, but not yet a reality