Key Concepts, Theories, and Dynamics of the Public Sphere
Please complete on time, no extension, and I also uploaded the essay example for you to reference in the file. to integrated the case study with theory is important for this assignment. Thank you!
Note: the following essay exemplars all scored in the HD range but may have some minor errors. Pay particular attention as to how the case study is integrated with theory and used to illuminate theory. There has also been a change in assessment instructions and in 2021 you are expected to use only ONE case study for any of the questions (Previously, some questions allowed students to use more than one). This change is designed to allow greater depth in analysis.
Background and Context
You are asked to write an academic essay with a case study, analysing and exploring the key concepts, theories, and dynamics of the public sphere, public opinion, and policy studied in this unit. Copy your chosen question to the top of your document.
Detail
Choose one of the following questions for your essay, using one case study to develop and illustrate your analysis and argument.
Essay Questions
1.How valid and relevant is Habermas’ classic theory expressed in The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere today? Is it useful for those engaged in public opinion, policy, and discussion, such as journalists, public relations and other media and communications professionals, politicians, corporate and community leaders, or citizens? Discuss the adequacy and uses of Habermas’ account for actual existing public spheres today –– with reference to one case study.
2.How do you see public spheres having changed with the arrival of new communication technology, such as the Internet, social media, and, most recently, automated media, AI, and algorithms? Choosing one case study, show how public discussion, opinion, and policy, requires new kinds of communication and media strategies.
3.What do you see as the relationship between the private sphere and public sphere in today’s world, especially in light of developments such as the rise of personalised, social, mobile media and apps, and the emergence of intimate, ‘affective’, and ‘little’ publics? Use one case study to demonstrate your argument.
4.‘Public spheres do not have to be democratic.’ Do you regard public spheres as always linked to ideas of democracy, and their success judged against democratic criteria? Referring to one case study, assess as to whether it is possible to have an adequate public sphere existing in an authoritarian society, or in a society that works on a different political model than democracy.
Learning Outcomes
Research and analyse the roles of various stakeholders, including states, NGOs and other civil society actors in the formation of public policy
Critically assess the communication approaches, strategies and tactics these stakeholders employ
Reflect on the role of the professional communicator in influencing public opinion and legitimating policy
Interrogate theoretical positions and assumptions regarding the concept of the public sphere and processes of public opinion formation in a postmodern context
Key Concepts, Theories, and Dynamics of the Public Sphere
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Course
Instructor
Date
Key Concepts, Theories, and Dynamics of the Public Sphere
Question 2. How do you see public spheres having changed with the arrival of new communication technology, such as the Internet, social media, and, most recently, automated media, AI, and algorithms? Choosing one case study, show how public discussion, opinion, and policy, requires new kinds of communication and media strategies.
The past 30 years have been characterized by a series of changes that have resulted in significant changes in the order of things. The developments have included an overwhelming technological change involving the communication systems. These changes have been occasioned by the development of the internet, a product of technology, which has had a tremendous impact on both spoken and printed world. These changes in the communication systems have also led to a brutal and unprecedented collapse of socialism, a domination of the knowledge society that has necessitated restricting of the intellectual framework and how the intellectuals present themselves in the public sphere. As this essay argues, these changes have created an artificial public sphere that allows individuals to choose whom to interact with and what to share.
A public sphere refers to an area in the social life where people meet to discuss and seek solutions to community challenges. Ultimately, such actions are geared towards influencing political action. It is a space that is common to all people, where each person can share their ideas and exchange information (Fabiani, 2015). The discussions undertaken through the public spheres are called public debates and involve expression of views on matters that affect the public. In such spaces, people express opposing ideas, discuss the challenges of each solution presented, and eventually come up with the most suitable solution. Thus, these spheres are often characterized by competing political and commercial interests among the members of the society. Each group presents their challenges in an attempt to establish a solution or gain leverage over the others.
In the 18th century, public sphere was an extensive space managed by the public authority. On the contrary, there was also the private sphere, which mainly included the civil society, which shaped how people interacted at a more personal level. The authoritative figures who managed public sphere included the state, the police, and the ruling class. Other authoritative figures included the church leaders, kingdom rulers, and any other leader who large groups of people. With time, the public sphere developed by incorporating the private sphere to advance the interests of the individuals before the state (Calhoun, 2010). People getting rights to vote for their leaders of choice is one of the products of the marriage between the public and the private sphere. It was during this time that people began realizing the extent to which the public sphere was affecting their private lives.
It is also worth noting that the public sphere was distinct from the official economy. This statement means that whereas the official economy included the state agents, public sphere served as an intermediary that advocated for the people’s rights before the government. It helped distinguish among the state apparatus, the economic markets, and the democratic associations. This desire to limit the authoritative control of the official economy on its people and to allow the people make independent decisions without coercion defined the democratic theory (Bassiouni, 1998). In this context, the people began perceiving the public sphere as a regulatory institution that checked the state authority. Thus, the public sphere theory operates on the tenet that government’s laws and policies must be steered by the public sphere and that the only legitimate governments are those that honor the needs of the public sphere. Consequently, the democratic theory of governance is based on the ability of the citizens to engage in an enlightened debate with the ultimate goal of influencing political decisions to better their lives.
It is impossible to talk about public sphere without mentioning Habermas’ analytical framework that explores the concept of the public sphere in civil society. The framework covers the emergence of public opinion from opinion. It explores the manner in which opinion evolved to suit the socio-cultural needs that incorporated the concept of commercialization in the participation, discussions and deliberations. Habermas asserts that the emergence of mass media reduced the active involvement of the public on political issues and instead, replaced it with entertainment and commercialism (Yetkinel & Çolak, 2017). The theory rebukes the mixing of literature with journalism, which was a byproduct of mass media and reversed the gains made by the consumerism culture. Consequently, the common man lost his democratic power to articulate issues affecting his livelihood. The concept of critical debate also lost its meaning as the mass media come up with a new way of presenting the issues by filtering out the crude information and only delivering what was good to the ears of the authorities.
Habermas criticized the electronic media that was fast taking over the reporting of the people’s concerns to the state as offering nice packaged information that blurred the line between fact and fiction. The electronic media trumped the print media in every way. However, Habermas notes that the electronic media has rendered the common man as a passive recipient of information (Yetkinel & Çolak, 2017). The electronic mass media came in as an intermediary to connect the public to the state. The media system collected information from the public aimed at the government, trimmed down some facts under the guise of appearing decent, and presented the edited information in a less offending but shallow manner. Consequently, the leaders began losing touch with the masses as they received distorted information. Similarly, the news that the public received from the same media houses was adulterated, which made the public to begin losing interest in the electronic media and paying less attention. As the communication environment continued to change, so did the public sphere. Habermas notes that the changing nature of communication transformed the public sphere from a dais of facts to an advertising space that attracted commercial activities.
Ultimately, the mass media turned the public sphere into a space for advertisers and Public Relations practitioners. The difference between the two parties is that the main objective of advertisers is to package their product in a manner that appeals to their target audience. On the contrary, the PR people go an extra mile to formulate facts and use them to influence the public opinion. Therefore, the goal of the PR people is to make the people agree to what they say, which amounts to staged public opinion. The media came across as an organ through which the people could voice their concerns in a more organized manner (Owen, 2020). However, the ruling elites have captured the media channels and are using them to advance their capitalist ideas. The media dilutes the public opinion, which makes it to lose its critical charm. The rulers use the media to advance their capitalist culture at the expense of the common man. Instead of brightening, enlightening, and informing the people by disseminating the information in a factual and reliable manner, the media has been used as a tool to advance fabricated information with an aim of appealing to a certain group of individuals.
After Habermas’ assessment of the transformation of the public sphere, there came the concept of cultural public sphere, which was advanced by Jim McGuigan. McGuigan tries to salvage the concept of the public sphere by trying to address the two main shortcoming, in which the interests of the bourgeoisie were misconstrued to be the universal interests and the manner in which the market dominated the communication system such ...