Habermas and Papacharissi

Habermas described what he saw as the "refeudalization" of the public sphere. He noted that there was an "interweaving of the public and private realm [in which] political authorities assume certain functions in the sphere of commodity exchange and social labor, [and] social powers now assume political functions...Large organizations strive for political compromises with the state and with each other, excluding the public sphere whenever possible" (p. 354). This comment is reminiscent of Mills' views on our democratic system as "weakened," with power wielded by "the military capitalism of private corporations." Mills noted that "Not only their money, but their friends, their interests, their training...are deeply involved with ...this corporate world" (p. 276).

Habermas wrote his book in 1974, before the advent of the internet. Papacharissi, writing 28 years later in the digital age, noted that "the power of our political system is negated by the influence of special interests, and generally by a growing dependency on a capitalist mentality" (p. 387). In her view, corporations have co-opted the internet as another source of profit making: "For a vast majority of corporations the internet is viewed as another mass entertainment; its widespread and cheap access being a small, but not insurmountable obstacle to profit making." Further, "Advertising revenue has more impact on programming than democratic ideals" (p. 386).

Papacharissi also questions whether we ever had the kind of idealized democratic society Dewey envisioned: "It is ironic that this pinnacle of democracy was rather undemocratic in its structure throughout the centuries, by not including women or people from lower social classes, a point acknowledged by Habermas himself" (p. 380). On a more positive note, she points out that the internet reflects the multiple public spheres that exist in contemporary America, reflecting our collective identities and interests. While not every household in our country has internet use, schools and libraries make the internet universally accessible to those with at least some education (children are introduced to the internet in elementary school). On a global scale, however, with only an estimated 6% of the world's population having internet access, the internet remains the purview of the privileged elite.

Papacharissi questions the quality of the information being transmitted on the internet: "Access to more information does not necessarily create more informed citizens, or lead to greater political activity" (p. 384). In fact, she shares Lanier's views that "Often, online communication is about venting emotion and expressing what Abramson et al. (1988) refer to as 'hasty opinions', rather than rational and focused discourse" (p. 385).

Despite the caveats mentioned above, Papacharissi believes that the internet "does possess the potential to change how we conceive ourselves, the political system, and the world surrounding us" (p. 388). She is hopeful that "groups of netizens brought together by common interests will debate and perhaps strive for the attainment of cultural goals." She concludes that the internet 's virtual sphere is currently "is a vision, not yet a reality" for effecting political and social change.