Counter public spheres and global modernity

This study is embedded in Jürgen Habermas’s theory of the public sphere and its transformation in the twenty-first century. This study aims to show that the public sphere is a concept that is relevant in today’s society. With the developments in the media plane particularly in the present century, the concept shows that it can transcend its traditional limits and can be understood in another context. This study mainly utilizes the method of textual analysis and exposition in further understanding the evolution, decline and transformation of the public sphere. The first chapter contains the usual introductory part. It serves as the preface to the main discussion of the study. The second chapter is a discussion of the evolution and rise of the public sphere theory in the eighteenth-century particularly in European societies. These historical underpinnings serve as the basis of the theory. The third chapter is a discussion of the decline of the public sphere brought about by socio-political changes in the nineteenth-century. This chapter shows that the public sphere has disintegrated mainly due to the citizens’ loss of critical attitude and the manipulation that occurred in the public sphere’s medium. The fourth chapter dwells with the new configurations of the public sphere in the twenty-first century brought about by the rise of different information technologies. Lastly, the fifth chapter contains the summary and conclusion of the study. This study concludes that with the rise of different information technologies in the present century particularly with the rise of the Internet, the concept of the public sphere has not only revived but it has also been transformed as well. The study implies that the developments in the media plane can benefit the society but only through the efforts of the society as a whole as well as with the help of citizens who continuously engage in fruitful dialogue and meaningful debate. Keywords: Bourgeois, Bourgeois Constitutional State, Literary Public Sphere, Political Public Sphere, Press, Public Sphere, Rational - Critical Debate, Representative publicity, Refeudalization

The American Sociologist, 2009

2011

The main purpose of this paper is to examine Habermas's account of the transformation of the public sphere in modern society. More specifically, the study aims to demonstrate that, whilst Habermas's approach succeeds in offering useful insights into the structural transformation of the public sphere in the early modern period, it does not provide an adequate theoretical framework for understanding the structural transformation of public spheres in late modern societies. To the extent that the gradual differentiation of social life manifests itself in the proliferation of multiple public spheres, a critical theory of public normativity needs to confront the challenges posed by the material and ideological complexity of late modernity in order to account for the polycentric nature of advanced societies. With the aim of showing this, the paper is divided into three sections. The first section elucidates the sociological meaning of the public/private dichotomy. The second section scrutinizes the key features of Habermas's theory of the public sphere by reflecting on (i) the concept of the public sphere, (ii) the normative specificity of the bourgeois public sphere, and (iii) the structural transformation of the public sphere in modern society. The third section explores the most substantial shortcomings of Habermas's theory of the public sphere, particularly its inability to explain the historical emergence and political function of differentiated public spheres in advanced societies.

The main purpose of this paper is to assess the validity of the contention that, over the past few decades, the public sphere has undergone a new structural transformation. To this end, the analysis focuses on Habermas's recent inquiry into the causes and consequences of an allegedly 'new' or 'further' [erneuten] structural transformation of the political public sphere. The paper is divided into two parts. The first part considers the central arguments in support of the 'new structural transformation of the public sphere' thesis, shedding light on its historical, political, economic, technological, and sociological aspects. The second part offers some reflections on the most important limitations and shortcomings of Habermas's account, especially with regard to key social developments in the early twenty-first century. The paper concludes by positing that, although the constitution of the contemporary public sphere is marked by major-and, in several respects, unprecedented-structural transformations, their significance should not be overstated, not least due to the enduring role of critical capacity in highly differentiated societies.

Political Studies, 1985

The paper interprets C. Wright Mills's distinction between 'private troubles' and 'public issues' as indicating both a conceptual and an institutional separation between civil society and the public sphere. It goes on to argue that Habermas's social theory is founded upon the view that 'distorted communication' should be analysed within an already institutionalized public space within civil society. Arguments that claim that the public sphere is degenerate on historical or theoretical grounds are rejected. The paper differentiates between pre-institutional and institutional levels of the public sphere and concludes by illustrating this conceptual distinction, first, through a brief discussion of 'new social movements' and Alain Touraine's actionist sociology, and secondly, through a discussion of natural justice and public inquiries.

European Journal of Social Theory, 2001

Given powerful globalizing processes under way, the topic of how to conceptualize the modern public sphere is becoming increasingly urgent. Amidst the array of alternatives, the efforts of Jürgen Habermas to attempt to balance out the two main conceptual requirements of this idea, a universalistic construction of the principle of shared interests and a sensitivity to the fact of modern pluralism, might seem a particularly promising option. In order to reconstruct the main motivations of, and to determine a set of criteria of assessment for, Habermas's ongoing attempt to outline a theory of the public sphere adequate to the conditions of the present, the article turns first to a discussion of the seminal formulations of The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. I suggest that the later writings are only partially successful in their attempt to redress some of the main conceptual difficulties that emerge in this early account.

This paper attempts a critical discussion on the Habermasian model of Public sphere. The concept of the public sphere has become a key term in social science literature since it was introduced by German scholar Jurgen Habermas as a philosophically and sociologically pertinent concept. The public sphere refers to the discursive space that exists in modern societies between the state and society. It deals with a domain that is generally related to civil society, but goes beyond it to refer to the wider category of the public. The public sphere comes into existence with the formation of civil society and the forms of associational politics to which it led. However, Habermasian model, although widely praised and accepted by many, is not without its criticisms. The second section of the paper makes an effort to bring together some of the major criticisms of the model as postulated mainly by feminist scholars.

If we are to believe what many sociologists are telling us, the public sphere is in a near-terminal state. Our ability to build solidarities with strangers and to agree on the general significance of needs and problems seems to be collapsing. These cultural potentials appear endangered from a variety of quarters: from the neo-liberal attempt to universalize the norms of the market and interpret democracy as another form of consumerism to the most recent efforts of the security state to constrain civil liberties in the face of terrorism. For the past four decades the public sphere has been at the top of Jürgen Habermas' theoretical agenda. He has explored the historical meaning of the concept, reconstructed its philosophical foundations in communication and repeatedly diagnosed its ongoing crises. In the contemporary climate, a systematic look at Habermas' lifelong project of rescuing the modern public sphere seems an urgent task.

Culture Unbound: Journal of Current Cultural …, 2010