Jürgen Habermas theory of the ‘public sphere’ is defined as people coming together in an egalitarian place to debate about issues, discuss things that are important in their lives and get the daily news. It is a place where private opinions become public promoting a democratic society in which we continue to strive for.
Our discussions are normally provoked by the latest news scandals that we read online. We source this information through different media forums such as Youtube, HayU, Instagram and Facebook. We are extremely quick to screenshot and send messages when something goes down… Especially when Kris Jenner made Kylie announce her pregnancy on the day of Super Bowl and got all the attention. The devil works hard but Kris Jenner works harder.
We see continuity and change in Habermas theory. Discussions still take place in a public setting but we now see the public sphere evolving online. I consider my ‘public sphere’ to be both online and offline where I’m able to meet up with friends to gossip, criticise and challenge ideas whether this be a face to face discussion or through the many group chats we have.
Habermas’s critics argue that “he idealizes the earlier bourgeois public sphere by presenting it as a forum of rational discussion and debate when in fact certain groups were excluded and participation was thus limited.” (Habermas 1989a: xix). But now the public sphere itself shifts with the rise of new social movements, new technologies, and new spaces of public interaction. Trending news stories and political drama spark heated discussions in my micro circle where my friends and family bring all sorts of opinions to the table.
Quite often I go out for breakfast with family and friends and this is where we have in-depth discussions about issues we have read in the media or even just talk about something that has been on our minds. These discussions about issues stimulate and form new ideas and opinions that I may not have thought about before. Although, this shows openness and trust in others they are concerns about what this means. There is a low barrier entry into the online ‘public sphere’ where we can express our opinions simply through a Wi-Fi connection. We have to be careful and able to distinguish between fake news and understand that not everyone expresses themselves in an ethical way.
In conclusion, Hamaberas theory touches on the positive side of the ‘public sphere’ but we can see how it is becoming problematic over time due to the media.
Kellner, D. (2019). Habermas, the Public Sphere, and Democracy: A Critical Intervention. [online] Pages.gseis.ucla.edu. Available at: https://pages.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/papers/habermas.htm
Mil's Blog 