Thursday 17 September 2009

Essay

Do the internet and the world wide web have the potential to be a more idealised version of the Habermas Public sphere?

In 1962, Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere J was written by Jurgen Habermas about what he believed was the ‘public sphere’ which had developed in the 18th century and had turned society from feudal to democracy. Habermas defined the public sphere as the sphere of private people who join together to form a ‘public’ and develop a democracy through opinions in public discussions. Habermas believed that the public sphere developed through men individually reading and obtaining information from books and journals and then coming together as a public in coffee houses to discuss their opinions on what they had read. Decmocracy was established as people could discuss issues as equals and express their opinions on what they had read, rather than passively receiving information.

Today, the internet has developed into a more idealised version of Habermas’ public sphere where people can communicate and express opinions online between different networks of people, for example in chat rooms where people from across the world can come together and discuss issues and share opinions on different events and issues. Internet access is growing rapidly and as more people worldwide have access to the internet, the public sphere is growing as different cultures and types of people can come together and discuss opinions. People using the internet can talk as equals, just as the original public sphere had developed and are even less likely to be judged on appearance online as they would have been when talking face to face.

People in a public sphere need prior knowledge of the point of discussion and through the development of Web 2.0, users can now edit the content of webpages, adding their own knowledge and sharing files online. For example, Wikpedia allows people to access information on almost all subjects online rather than getting information from books and journals. Websites such as Wikipedia also allow users to edit the content of pages to add their own knowledge which creates a large bank of knowledge from a variety of different people. However, this could be influenced by opinion and therefore may mean that information online is not particularly reliable, resulting in a less effective public sphere if people are misinformed.

Web 2.0 has allowed the internet to develop into a more idealised version of the public sphere, especially through social networking websites such as Facebook and Twitter. Social networking sites allow users to create their own profiles in which they can edit the information about themselves, join networks of friends, upload and share photos and videos and update their status to let friends know what they have been doing. These websites allows instant updates to be sent to friends, without having to meet face to face and information can be sent almost instantly through instant messaging services due to increasing internet connection speed, meaning that the public sphere is becoming more and more effective through the internet. Google documents is another example of how Web 2.0 can help to develop the online public sphere through the internet as it allows people to collaborate and come together to work on a document, posting it online so others can then work on it on another computer. These examples of Web 2.0 allow people the freedom and equality to change the information they receive online, and allows them to discuss and share opinions, suggesting that it is becoming a more idealised version of Habermas’ public sphere.

On the other hand, access to the internet is still limited to those who can afford it and those of particular ages, as older people tend not to use the internet as a public sphere as much as younger people, who particularly use Web 2.0 and social networking sites.  Therefore the online public sphere may not have the potential to become a more idealised version of the original idea of the public sphere as it restricts the number and variety of people who can use the internet, therefore restricting the effectiveness of the public sphere.

The information that people receive online may often be unreliable as it is controlled or censored by certain companies or individuals who may portray a biased account in favour of what they believe. If a certain company or if a government body monitored internet chat rooms, people may limit what they post online and may not feel as though they have freedom of speech as they would when speaking in person which would prevent the internet from becoming a more idealised version of the public sphere. As internet users can also edit the content of webpages such as Wikipedia, they may write a biased account or opinion onto the webpages which can misinform other people who look to it as a reliable source of information. This can effect the public sphere as people may have misinformed discussion online, preventing it from being a public sphere. As the internet is very influential, people may be misinformed by information they receive online and therefore will undermine the idea of democracy promoted by the public sphere.

The internet is constantly developing and improving and it does have the potential to become a more idealised version of Habermas’ public sphere if it develops so that more people of different ages have access to the internet and use it as a public sphere. However, it also has many problems such as unreliable sources and content of websites which could challenge the ideas of democracy behind the public sphere.

No comments:

Post a Comment