Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Stanley
Over the last 30 years, the public sphere has emerged as a ‘concept
[...] which could make possible a free and legal exchange of
views’(Holland: 2004.p68), which of course offers a somewhat utopian
idea of everybody having access to, and input in this public sphere.
Historically however, it has taken over a century to prize it from the
clutches of the bourgeoisie, who have traditionally horded both access to,
and production of the media that so heavily influences the topics of
discussion within the public sphere. The old fashioned model of the
1
bourgeois staring down their noses at the working class still holds true to
some publications, even today. In fact, the concept of everybody having a
voice had not materialised until as late as the mid 90s, when the internet
started to appear more consistently in the homes of the public, although
primarily in the conventional ‘west’. There are, of course, parts of the
globe to which internet access is not abundant, and this must be
acknowledged. Still, as more people began to have access to a platform
which allowed the individual to broadcast their own media, at relatively
inexpensive cost, the public were given the ability to express their own
opinions without the need to print, distribute and fund it. Moving forward
to the most contemporary era and one can literally star their own news
broadcasting website accessible to anyone with an internet connection.
2
to generate public image within the sphere has hampered the ability of
the media to present ultimate truth and un-tampered fact.
3
reach into the homes of realistically 100% of western homes in one shape
or form is staggering, further tightening its grip on the public sphere.
Besides total relinquish of outside communication, it is inescapable as
newspapers, magazines, television, radio, the internet and all other forms
of media are at every junction, in every doorway, on all journeys and
everything in between.
To what extent and on what level then does ‘Joe average’ use the
information provided by media outlets the world across? The statement
‘Journalism, like any other narrative which is the work of human agency is
essentially ideological’ (McNair:2002.p6), would suggest that the roots of
media production lie deep in the fabric of society’s ideals, and often
represent those of the creator of such ideals. The media effectively
teaches society how to think, feel and aspire, placing them at the
forefront of the public sphere hierarchy. The workings of Stuart Hall on
Encoding/Decoding (1980) allows a more in depth analysis of this
subliminal broadcasting of ideals, believing ‘the moments of encoding and
decoding, though only ‘relatively autonomous’ in relation to the
communicative process as a whole, are determinate moments’
(Hall:1973,p167). In capitalist systems the process of media consumption
is circular and by virtue of supply and demand, the audience in effect has
an influence on the ideals and messages produced by journalists
4
themselves. The popularity and longevity of media productions depends
on its reception by the public. Therefore, Hall would argue that as a core
component of the public sphere, the media is actually influenced heavily
by the members of it. Effectively, the public sphere is emperor unto itself,
and the media are just a fragmented part of this structure, albeit a
defining one.
With the introduction of the internet to the public forum, the world
has seen a change to the very core of the public sphere, and one which
has yet to find its metaphorical feet. With hyper-connectivity at the centre
of most media outlets current plans for progression, the transition from
physical newspapers to online platforms has begun, and is picking up
speed. As yet, the media industry has yet to capitalise financially on this
development but once accomplished the need for paper delivery will be
redundant. With internet technologies such as Twitter, Wordpress,
Facebook and many other applications, the grip the media has on the
public sphere will be loosened somewhat, but it is down to the public
themselves to realise this and capture a larger stake in its structural
prism. Only time will tell as to the absolute ramifications of transformation
5
from hardback to ‘e-back’, but the certainty of the impact on the media
influence of the public sphere will appear bruised, but not battered.
Bibliography
Cottle, Simon (ed.) (2003) ‘News, Public Relations and Power’ London,
Sage
Garnham, Nicholas (1986) ‘The Media and the Public Sphere’, in Peter
Golding, Graham Murdock, and Philip Schlesinger (eds.) ‘Communicating
Politics: Mass Communications and the Political Process’, Leicester,
Leicester University Press [Also in Garnham 1990]
Holland, Patricia (2004) ‘The Politics of the Smile’, in Cynthia Carter and
Linda Steiner (eds.) ‘Media and Gender’, Maidenhead: Open University
Press
6
McNair, Brian (1994) ‘News and Journalism in the UK’, London: Routeledge
Tester, Kieth (2001) ‘Compassion Fatigue and the ethics of the journalistic
field’ in ‘Compassion, Morality and the Media’, Buckingham: Open
University Press
Warhover, Thomas A (2000) ’Public Journalism and the Press: The Virginia
Pilot Experience’ Anthony J Eksterowicz and Robert N Roberts (eds.)
Oxford, Rowman and Little Publishers Inc.