Internet as Public Sphere?!

Jurgen Habermas said public sphere is a realm of our social life in which something approaching public opinion can he formed. And the access is guaranteed to all citizens. The printing press, television, to Habermas, might carry the capacity of forming a public sphere. However, when the private interest came in, and when the press catered to commerce, people began criticizing the hope for the press to gather public opinions. Internet came in as a new medium which lit people’s hope to form a public forum.

Zizi Papacharissi provided the utopian and anti-utopian view to discuss if Internet supplied a public sphere. The positive view says that internet was a medium that could help democratization, and increase politic participation. Skeptics say that only 6 % of earth population has access to the internet; internet as a public sphere harbors an illusion of openness. Both views are right. I think we do not have to put too much pressure on online media, which is never an answer to promote democracy, which is not responsible for people’s interests in talking politics, and which is not the panacea to the world’s problems. Online media is a new platform for information sharing. It is coincident that it has some capacities to revolutionize people’s ways of communication and networking. But when people have X, it is common that they would want more, they want X, Y, and Z.

It is convenient that we have online archive so that we can retrieve data easily, and so that we do not go to dungeon-like chamber trying to find an article a year ago. It’s great that we can talk instantly and simultaneously with friends on messenger. Internet is surely a powerful carrier of information. However, can internet take over print? How do print and online journalism walk forward hand in hand? Or how does internet kill print? What’s next? What is the value of print?