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

Lincoln Dahlberg

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · 2006 · 396 citations · 39 references

Concepts

TL;DR

Cyberspace’s two‑way, decentralized communications are argued to create autonomous sites of rational‑critical discourse that could extend the public sphere beyond state and economic control. The paper evaluates how the Internet actually enhances the public sphere and calls for focused research to address identified problems. The authors compare online deliberative practices to a Habermas‑derived normative model of the public sphere, using general and specific Internet studies to assess democratic possibilities and limits. While many online forums exhibit vibrant exchange and rational critique, expansion is constrained by state and corporate colonization, reflexivity deficits, disrespectful listening, identity verification difficulties, exclusion, and dominance by certain actors.

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 Jurgen 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.

References

39