Introduction
The Internet, with its unique characteristics, is perceived to provide 'real opportunities for democratization and political transformation, especially in societies where freedom of speech and expression is constrained by government controls.'[1] The medium can potentially support marginalized individuals or groups as it allows them to express their ideas and extend their influence.[2] The optimist of the potential of Internet argues that this medium 'allow[s] anyone anywhere access to information and opinions of anyone else, anywhere else' therefore, it 'soon could become a major tool for democracy.'[3]
There is a belief that the Internet is in some ways different from other media and communication tools. Those unique features of the new medium which include a lack of editorial control, a more decentralized nature, a global reach, interactivity, and extensive networking capacity are believed to 'provide solutions to our rather tired system of representative democracy.'[4] In other words, with such attributes, the Internet has the potential to endorse a new 'more democratic' public sphere. This essay examines the potential of cyberspace as a new public sphere, especially, in relation to those unique features which are non-existent in the mainstream media. Firstly, it discusses the Internet's role as new public sphere, especially in relation to organs of information. Secondly, it examines another role of the new medium as part of the public sphere namely as arena for political debates.
It is argued that the Internet has the potential to become a new form of public sphere. Its unique features such as a lack of editorial control, a more decentralized nature, and global reach have formed the Internet into a more democratic organ of information. In addition, other attributes, namely interactivity and networking capacity, have promoted this new medium as a more democratic arena for public debates. However, it is also argued that the issues of digital divide and commercialization of the Internet could diminish such prospects.
The Internet as New Public Sphere: Organs of Information
Jürgen Habermas, a German philosopher who initially introduced the term public sphere defines it as 'a space of institutions and practices between the private interests of everyday life in civil society and the realm of state power.' It is stated that that the existence of a public sphere is vital to a democratic society.[5] In his elaboration Habermas mentions two forms of public sphere namely 'organs of information and political debate' and 'institutions of political discussion.'[6] The former refers to the media; meanwhile, the later refers to parliaments, political parties, public congregations, and other public realms where socio-political discussions occur. However this essay focuses on the media, especially the Internet, as a new public sphere in the form of organ of information and an arena for public debates.
Does the Internet really become a new public sphere by performing as an organ of information and an arena for political debates? It is maintained that the medium can perform as an organ of information and arena for political debates. Moreover, with its unique features, the new medium has even potential to be a more democratic organ of information and arena for public debates.
The first attribute, the lack of editorial control, for example, makes censoring information distributed via the Internet relatively more difficult compared to those via more traditional media.[7] Consequently, applying editorial control upon online contents such as those applied to the print or broadcasting media is almost impossible and Internet users can post ideas or information on the web without any approval from certain 'authoritative' bodies. Indeed, some countries such as China,[8] Cuba,[9] and Saudi Arabia[10] have been trying to apply 'censorship' to the Internet yet their efforts have only succeeded to a certain limited extent.
From an information seeker's perspective, this feature is very beneficial especially in a place where the mainstream media is tightly controlled by the government so that it is difficult to obtain 'unbiased' information from the mainstream media. Consequently, the Internet becomes a significant alternative source of 'unbiased' information. For example, Sen points out that during the New Order era, the Indonesian political activists utilized the Internet to obtain 'unbiased' alternative information as the internal media were mostly biased due to very tight regulation.[11]
Meanwhile from the information disseminator's view, such a feature is equally important as it provides freedom of expression. With the absence of censorship in cyberspace, voices of dissent have space and are not regarded as unacceptable. As a result, voices of different political views and interests have an equal opportunity to be heard. This situation is essential for nurturing a democratic society. Regarding the significance of freedom of expression in a democratic society, Keane notes that in a society where there is no freedom of expression then that 'society is surely dying, or dead.'[12] This demonstrates that the 'free-censorship' feature of this medium has democratized information both for the information seekers and disseminators. The mainstream media, however, cannot perform such roles easily as they are more easily subject to censorship.
Secondly, with a more decentralized nature compared to the mainstream media, the Internet promises universal access especially for the dissemination of ideas or information. Although the media is traditionally regarded as the watchdog of democracy,[13] which means that they become the voice of the truth, there are instances where the media, especially the mainstream ones, become the voice of the politically powerful majority and neglect or even target the minority. China's Xinhua News Agency is a good example. It is reported that this institution changed its reporting about Falun Gong and conveyed a persuasive story to serve the government desires. [14]
Accordingly, the decentralized nature of the Internet is envisaged to abolish such inequalities as 'the medium is a universal space' and 'it lacks established hierarchies of power'.[15] This in turn empowers the marginalized minority to 'speak' regardless of differences in social, cultural, and political aspects of life, which is essential for democracy. Again, it shows how the Internet has the potential to perform as a 'more democratic' organ of information.
Another distinct characteristic of the medium is its global reach. Although several electronic and print media companies have world wide networks, they are nothing compared to the Internet. In developed countries such as the USA, the United Kingdom and Australia for examples, broadcasting media such as cable television networks find it difficult to penetrate the whole population as they heavily rely on physical infrastructures. In the USA, cable television services spread rapidly in metropolitan areas yet are slowly adopted in the countryside. In Britain, for example, only one-third of households subscribe to cable services. The slow penetration of cable television has also occurred in Australia.[16] It shows how difficult it is for broadcasting media to proliferate. Penetrating a national population is very difficult, let alone to penetrate world wide communities.
Difficulties to reach global audiences are also faced by the print media. The harshly-challenged intention of Play Boy magazine to penetrate the Indonesian audience recently is an obvious example. It was reported that its second edition had been delayed due to strong protests from the Indonesian public.[17] Politically, its existence is also under threat with wide support to pass the draft of Indonesian Laws on Pornography into legally binding laws[18] as the Laws will ban such publication in Indonesia. This demonstrates that reaching a global audience is very difficult for the mainstream media. In addition, even if print or broadcasting media had such global reach; it would involve a huge amount of capital investments which would make it impossible for an individual or organization with limited sources of funding. It will also take a long time to achieve such capacity.
On the contrary, with a computer and telephone connection, which is much more affordable compared to investments for a global reach print or broadcasting media, an individual or small group can spread their ideas globally. Another advantageous feature of the medium is its instant global reach. While mainstream media probably take years to establish global networks to reach a global audience, one can send messages to the entire world with a click of a mouse. These arguments demonstrate that the Internet with its unique attributes has the potential to become a 'more democratic' organ of information compared to those of the mainstream.
The Internet as New Public Sphere: Arena for Public Debates
The second role of the Internet in the public sphere is as an arena for public debates. There have been several public debates taking place in cyberspace discussing social, economic and political issues. Schapelle Corby's case, for example, became a major issue in Australia resulting in the birth of hundreds of websites devoted to discuss on that issue.[19] Similarly, Indonesia's Maluku conflicts have also driven intense debate among Indonesians on the Internet.[20] Debates over significant public issues also took place in China such as the issue of the explosion of a school building in Jiangxi province and the accident of an American surveillance aircraft on China's territory.[21] This all demonstrates that this new medium has a capacity to be an arena for public debates. Interestingly, such debates occur not only in developed countries such as Australia which has high figures of Internet users, 84% of the Australian adults had Internet access in 2004,[22] but also in the developing country such as Indonesia where penetration of the medium is still very low. [23]
It is argued that such an occurrence is related to two unique characteristics of the Internet, namely interactivity and networking capacity. These two features, combined with a lack of editorial control, a more decentralized nature, and global reach, are believed to have created a more democratic arena for public debates. Although mainstream media are still believed to retain similar roles, the interactivity and networking capacity of the Internet offer a more democratic arena of public debates.
Print media provides no interactivity at all, as readers mainly receive contents without any capacity to interact with the reporters, editors or other readers. It is true that a reader can write 'letters to the editor' or even contribute articles to publish, yet such opportunities are very limited. Broadcasting media probably have more interactive features these days as it is common to watch ordinary people 'appear' on the screen to comment on certain issues. However, this form of interactivity is still limited considering that such occurrence is not so frequent. In addition, the appearance of such 'ordinary' people is usually only at a glance and for adding 'flavor' to the content rather than to really dig up information.
On the other hand, cyberspace provides a wide opportunity of interactivity. Chat rooms, blogs, emails are the most prominent features used for interaction among Internet users. They enable the Internet users to exchange ideas and information in immediate and non hierarchical manners which are impossible within mainstream media realms. The immediacy of interaction within cyber space is unquestionable as instant messenger software enables real time communication via text, voice and even video messages. Furthermore, hierarchical barriers are non existent among the users as an ordinary person can make an equal contribution to that of someone with an authoritative power. As a result, combined with global reach capacity, the Internet enables people from every part of the globe with different interests, views, political alliance, and social status to 'meet' and debate public issues which is not possible within the mainstream media realm.
The last feature of the medium which supports its significance as a new public sphere, especially as an arena for public debates, is the Internet's networking capacity. As a result of the lack of editorial control, a more decentralized nature, global reach and interactivity, this medium grants the users capacity to create networks. This capacity is essential in public sphere discourse as with networking individuals with similar interests and views can share their interests and views and even create a union to promote them. This capacity is very significant as a union's voice is likely to be heard more than an individual's.
The networking capacity is even more important with regard to people whose interests and views are 'unacceptable' politically or culturally. Political movements groups such as Sri Lanka's Tamil Tigers[24] and the Irish Republican Socialist Movement (IRSM)[25] are among the groups which utilize such networking capacity to promote their views and purposes. Meanwhile, gays and lesbians, who are culturally marginalized in a 'conservative' Asian country such as Indonesia, also benefit from such features as the medium has facilitated them to 'meet' while maintaining secrecy.[26]
Underground political movements and culturally 'unacceptable' unions such as gays and lesbians are obviously impossible to disseminate and promote their views via mainstream media. Censorship is obviously an obstacle that would be difficult to overcome. However, the new 'free-censorship' medium has abolished such obstacles. Furthermore, its global reach feature has enabled those marginalized people to create networks so that they can share ideas and promote them. It is possible to establish such networks although they are probably dispersed around the globe. This shows that both attributes have formed Internet as a more democratic arena of public debates.
Indeed, apart from those prospects there are also other issues which diminish the capacities of the Internet as a new public sphere. Issues such as digital divide and commercialization of the Internet are indeed too important to be neglected as they potentially hinder the development of the Internet as a new public sphere. Regarding to digital divide, Norris points out that even in the developed countries such as the United States, Sweden and Australia, such divide still exist as indicated by the exclusion of certain groups or areas from Internet access,[27] let alone in the third world countries. Meanwhile, the commercialization of the Internet is highlighted by Dahlberg, stating that the increasing control of the Internet by major corporate players makes the Internet becomes 'consumer-oriented' and 'marginalize online public discourse'.[28] As a result those factors could diminish the potential of the new medium as a new form of public sphere.
Conclusions
This essay has demonstrated that the argument maintaining that the Internet 'soon could become a major tool for democracy by allowing anyone anywhere access to information and opinions of anyone else, anywhere else' is valid. Several unique attributes of this new medium such as the lack of editorial control, a more decentralized nature, global reach, interactivity, and networking capacity support its capacity as a new public sphere, especially in the form of an organ of information and as an arena for public debates.
As an organ of information, this medium has prospects to surpass mainstream media. Its lack of editorial control, its decentralized nature and global reach have promoted the Internet as a more democratic organ of information compared to the mainstream media. Similarly, its interactivity and networking capacity have endorsed it as a more democratic arena of public debates. However, apart from the prospects, the issues of digital divide and commercialization of cyberspace become potential threats to realize the Internet as new elements of public sphere.
List of References
Abbot, P. Jasson, 'Democracy@internet.asia? The challenges to the emancipatory potential of the net: lessons from China and Malaysia', Third World Quarterly. Vol. 22. No. 1. 2001.
Asia Media. INDONESIA: Playboy holds off on second edition. URL: http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/ article.asp?parentid=43732 (Accessed 2 September 2006).
Chen, H., Chiung. 'Framing Falun Gong: Xinhua News Agency's Coverage of the New Religious Movement in China'. Asian Journal of Communication. Vol. 15. No. 1. March 2005.
Christopher R. Hughes and Gudrun Wacker, ed. China and the internet: politics of the digital leap forward. Routledge Curzon. London. 2003.
Collins, G.A. Anthropology of the Internet: The Nationalists of TamilNet.com. Current Anthropology. Vol. 46. No. 5. Dec 2005.
Dahlberg, Lincoln. 'Extending the Public Sphere through Cyberspace: The Case of Minnesota E-Democrazy'. First Monday. URL: http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/ issue6_3/dahlberg/index.html#note10 (Accessed 9 September 2006).
Dartnel, Michael. 'The Electronic Starry Plough: the Enationalism of the Irish Republican Socialist Movement (IRSM)'. First Monday. Vol. 6. No.12. 2001. URL: http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue6_12/dartnell/index.html (Accessed 3 September 2006).
Gorman, L & McLean D. Media and Society in the Twentieth Century: a historical introduction. Blackwell Publishing. Melbourne. 2003.
Hill, T., David and Sen, Krishna. 'Netizens in Combat: Conflict on the Internet in Indonesia'. Asian Studies Review. Vol. 26. No. 2. June 2002.
Hill, T., David and Sen, Krishna. Media, Culture and Politics in Indonesia. Oxford University Press. South Melbourne. 2000.
Jamal, Amal. 'State-Building and Media Regime: Censoring the Emerging Public Sphere in Palestine'. Gazette. Vol. 63 (2-3).
Kalathil, Shanthi and Boas, C., Taylor. 'The Internet and State Control in Authoritarian Regimes: China, Cuba, and the Counterrevolution'. Global Policy Program. No. 21. July 2001.
Kellner, Douglas. Habermas, the Public Sphere, and Democracy: A Critical Intervention. URL: http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/kellner.html (Accessed 9 August 2006).
Laurent, Erick. 'Sexuality and human rights: an Asian perspective (Author Abstract)'. Journal of Homosexuality. Vol. 48. Jan-Feb 2005.
Lim, Merlyna. Islamic Radicalism and Anti-Americanism in Indonesia: The Role of the Internet. URL: www.eastwestcenterwashington.org/publications (Accessed 9 August 2006).
Norris, Pippa. Digital divide: civic engagement, information poverty, and the internet worldwide. Cambridge University Press. 2001.
Noszlopy, Laura (ed.). 'The Schapelle Corby Show: Drugs, Media and Society'. The Australian Journal of Anthropology. Vol. 17. No. 1. 2006.
Schultz, Julianne. Reviving The Fourth Estate: democracy, accountability, and the media. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge (UK). 1998.
Sullivan, Laura and Fernandez, Victor. 'Cybercuba.com (monist): Electronic literacy, resistance, and postrevolutionary Cuba'. Routledge. 2000.
Ward, Stephen and Vedel, Thierry. 'Introduction: The Potential of the Internet Revisited'. Parliamentary Affairs. Vol. 59. No. 2. 2006.
www.dcita.gov.au. Australia Online 3rd Quarter 2004: Statistics 2005, URL: http://www.dcita.gov.au/__data/ assets/pdf_file/19186/05020014_POCKET_STATS.pdf. (Accessed 1 September 2006).
www.gatra.com. FPI Desak DPR Segera Setujui UU Anti-Pornografi (FPI urges the Parliament to agree upon the draft of the Laws on Pornography). URL: http://www.gatra.com/2006-01-18/artikel.php?id=91554 (Accessed 2 September 2006).
[1] Abbot, P., Jasson, 'Democracy@internet.asia? The challenges to the emancipatory potential of the net: lessons from China and Malaysia', Third World Quarterly, Vol. 22, No. 1, 2001, p. 99.
[2] Lim, Merlyna, Islamic Radicalism and Anti-Americanism in Indonesia: The Role of the Internet, 48. URL: www.eastwestcenterwashington.org/publications (Accessed 20 August 2006).
[3] Fenchurch cited in Ward, Stephen and Vedel, Thierry, 'Introduction: The Potential of the Internet Revisited', Parliamentary Affairs Vol. 59 No. 2, 2006, 210.
[4] Ward, Stephen and Vedel, Thierry, 'Introduction: The Potential of the Internet Revisited', Parliamentary Affairs Vol. 59 No. 2, 2006, 210.
[5] Habermas, Jurgen cited in Kellner, Douglas, Habermas, the Public Sphere, and Democracy: A Critical Intervention, URL: http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/faculty/kellner/kellner.html (Accessed 9 August 2006).
[6] Kellner, Douglas, 'Habermas, the Public'.
[7] Lim, Merlyna, Islamic Radicalism and Anti-Americanism, 8.
[8] Christopher R. Hughes and Gudrun Wacker, ed., China and the internet: politics of the digital leap forward, Routledge Curzon, London, 2003, 58.
[9] Sullivan, Laura and Fernandez, Victor, 'Cybercuba.com (monist): Electronic literacy, resistance, and postrevolutionary Cuba', Routledge, 2000, 233.
[10] Kalathil, Shanthi and Boas, C., Taylor, 'The Internet and State Control in Authoritarian Regimes: China, Cuba, and the Counterrevolution', Global Policy Program, No. 21, July 2001, 2.
[11] Hill, T., David and Sen, Krishna, Media, Culture and Politics in Indonesia, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne, 2000, 200.
[12] Jamal, Amal, 'State-Building and Media Regime: Censoring the Emerging Public Sphere in Palestine', Gazette, Vol. 63(2-3), 263.
[13] Schultz, Julianne, Reviving The Fourth Estate: democracy, accountability, and the media, Cambridge (UK): Cambridge University Press, 1998, i.
[14] Chen, H., Chiung, 'Framing Falun Gong: Xinhua News Agency's Coverage of the New Religious Movement in China', Asian Journal of Communication, Vol. 15, No. 1, March 2005, 21.
[15] B. Warf & J Grimes cited in Abbott, P. Jason, 'Democracy@internet.asia?', 99.
[16] Gorman, L & McLean D, Media and Society in the Twentieth Century: a historical introduction, Blackwell Publishing, Melbourne, 2003, 191-192.
[17] Asia Media, INDONESIA: Playboy holds off on second edition, URL: http://www.asiamedia.ucla.edu/ article.asp?parentid=43732 (Accessed 2 September 2006).
[18] www.gatra.com, FPI Desak DPR Segera Setujui UU Anti-Pornografi (FPI urges the Parliament to agree upon the draft of the Laws on Pornography), URL: http://www.gatra.com/2006-01-18/artikel.php?id=91554 (Accessed 2 September 2006).
[19] Noszlopy, Laura (ed.), 'The Schapelle Corby Show: Drugs, Media and Society', The Australian Journal of Anthropology, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2006, 80.
[20] Hill, T., David and Sen, Krishna, 'Netizens in Combat: Conflict on the Internet in Indonesia', Asian Studies Review, Vol. 26, No. 2, June 2002, 176.
[21] Kalathil, Shanthi and Boas, C., Taylor, 'The Internet and State', 6.
[22] www.dcita.gov.au, Australia Online 3rd Quarter 2004: Statistics 2005, http://www.dcita.gov.au/__data/ assets/pdf_file/19186/05020014_POCKET_STATS.pdf (Accessed 1 September 2006).
[23] Hill, T., David and Sen, Krishna, 'Netizens in Combat, 168.
[24] Collins, G.A., Anthropology of the Internet: The Nationalists of TamilNet.com, Current Anthropology, Vol. 46, No. 5, Dec 2005, 701.
[25] Dartnel, Michael, 'The Electronic Starry Plough: the Enationalism of the Irish Republican Socialist Movement (IRSM)', First Monday, Vol. 6, No.12, 2001, URL: http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/ issue6_12/dartnell/index.html (Accessed 3 September 2006).
[26] Laurent, Erick, 'Sexuality and human rights: an Asian perspective (Author Abstract)', Journal of Homosexuality, Vol. 48. Jan - Feb 2005, 163.
[27] Norris, Pippa, Digital divide: civic engagement, information poverty, and the internet worldwide, Cambridge University Press, 2001, 10.
[28] Dahlberg, Lincoln, 'Extending the Public Sphere through Cyberspace: The Case of Minnesota E-Democrazy', First Monday, URL: http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue6_3/dahlberg/index.html#note10 (Accessed 9 September 2006).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
