The Transformation of Public Sphere

The Transformation of Public Sphere

Introduction
As we know, people always want to discuss some public affairs such as politics with their friends, relatives as well as colleagues wherever in a physical or virtual place. These places are defined public sphere. In the past, public sphere is a real space where individuals could discuss questions face to face. However, in the present age, the advent of high technology approximately changed the way that people communicate with each other. As Aihwa Ong (1999:8) stated that “there is a sense that the world we live in has changed dramatically, it is as if the continental plates of social life are sliding into new and unstable alignments”. In the digital times, public sphere includes the diversity of both the mass media and Internet and wireless communication networks (McChesney 2007). Individuals are no longer want to go to a real place because there is a much more easier way to communicate with each other in modern times. They could utilize online communication platforms no matter where they are. The process of globalization has shifted the debate from the national domain to the global debate. Accordingly, the public sphere as the space of debate on public affairs has also shifted from the national to the global and is increasingly constructed around global communication networks.

This essay will present some examples to identify how public sphere transformed from national to transnational influenced by media platform. First of all, the paper will discuss the definition of public sphere. The public sphere is the space of communication of ideas and projects that emerge from society and are addressed to the decision makers in the institutions of society. Secondly, the essay will analyze the previous public sphere before the advent of the Internet. Mass media such as the newspaper, television programs and radios is becoming the most important place for public to get involved in public affairs. As John Thompson (2000) has argued, media have become the major component of the public sphere in the industrial society. Thirdly, this essay will discuss the transformation of the public sphere mainly focus on the advent of Internet. This essay will take various examples to illustrate how Internet affected the movement of public sphere. Finally, the essay will conclude the movement of public sphere influenced by media platforms.

First of all, the essay will review the conceptualizations of public sphere. The title "Public Sphere" comes from Jurgen Habermas. And most contemporary definitions of public sphere are based on the Jürgen Habermas’s book The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere – An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. The normative definition of the public sphere is as a new opening in the social and political fabric of Europe during the 18th and 19th centuries. The public sphere is a public place between the state and the society where people could discuss everything without interference. As Hauser (1998:87) presents public sphere is “a discursive space in which individuals and groups congregate to discuss matters of mutual interest and, where possible, to reach a common judgment”. The public sphere can be seen as "a theater in modern societies in which political participation is enacted through the medium of talk" and "a realm of social life in which public opinion can be formed" in Asen’s(1999) thoughts.

In the present age, the world changed dramatically, public sphere is no more as the same as before. “The material expression of the public sphere varies with context, history, and technology, but in its current practice, it is certainly different from the ideal type of eighteenth century bourgeois public sphere around which Habermas (1989) formulated his theory” (Castells, 2008:79). Physical space such as public space in cities as well as universities is popular public sphere in the past. However, online space has emerged to replace physical space step by step. Even though, the cultural institutions, and informal networks of public opinion formation have always been important elements in shaping the development of the public sphere (Low and Smith 2006).

The most important factor that influences the development of public sphere should be media. As John Thompson (2000) has argued, media have become the major component of the public sphere in the industrial society. Specifically, the national public sphere mainly is the newspaper, which means the traditional media platform. As Volkmer (2003) states that there is a public sphere in the international area. For this reason, the digital media is the transnational public sphere. The Internet and horizontal networks of communication play a crucial role in the transnational public sphere. “There is a shift from a public sphere anchored around the national institutions of territorially bound societies to a public sphere constituted around the media system” (Castells, 2008:79).

In Habermas’s written work, there is two main structural transformation of public sphere after the birth of capitalism. The first transition happened in the United States, the United Kingdom, France and German in the end of seventeen century. There was a bourgeois public sphere for rational-critical political debate that formed a new phenomenon called public opinion. The bourgeois public sphere flourished within the early laissez-faire, free-market, largely pre-industrial capitalist order of liberalism from the late eighteenth century to the mid-nineteenth century (Habermas, 1989). At that time, the intellectuals of capitalism from discussed from culture, arts and scholarism to social issues or political affairs in coffeehouses as well as salons mainly in western countries.

The second transformation of public sphere was starting 1830s, from the liberal bourgeois public sphere to the modern mass society of the social welfare state. A new constellation of social, cultural, political, and philosophical developments has been taken shape. In the nineteenth century, mass media had been the main domestic public sphere in western countries. People used the mass media platform such as newspapers and radios to present these own opinions about current issues and political affairs. The public sphere has transformed from local places to mass media platform which has become a decisive role of national public sphere at that time in westerns countries.

The public sphere was also influenced by electronic media. The large screen makes the public sphere much more private in social life. As Scott Mcquire (2011：141) argued “As the private home becomes a media center, electronic media such as radio and television colonized the public sphere and subsumed more and more of the roles—political, educational, religious, social—one reserved for public space”. Therefore, one person could use the domestic screen to receive all events if you are not leaving your home. People could watch news, basketball match and some other interesting things by the large-screens. However, “it always has notable limits, including the nostalgic idealization of an order public culture and the attribution of a rigid set of effects to television technology” Mcquire (2010：569).

Radio, and cameras these which we named modern media occupy individuals’ life with their unique instantiation. “This earlier phase is now going way to era in which media technologies have become ubiquitous, mobile and scalable, and are commonly embedded in urban infrastructure or carried in the course of everyday life, generating new possibilities for social interaction” (Mcquire, 2011：140). In fact, the mass media almost substitute physical public spaces to play the role of the public sphere in modern times. However, these media platforms mainly are national public sphere, even though sometimes individuals could watch some international news or shows via televisions.

Telephones are also changing the form of public sphere. People could communicate by telephones and do not need to meet in a physical place. However, telephones have to use in a stationary location such as the office, home or a public phone booth. It is convenient because you could contact your friends even though you are far away from him. However, it mainly focuses on domestic communication because it is too expensive for making an international call.

And then mobile phones were blooming after widely use of telephones at that moment. It is much more flexible than that of telephones. People are no longer needed to in a specific place to make phone calls because they can take the mobile phones wherever they are. Specifically, communicating with friends and relatives to use audio phone calls as well as text messages (SMS) are a new way, which promote the development of public sphere. It is a normal phenomenon to see people talking on the mobile phones on some streets, in train stations, restaurants and in all other public spaces. This phenomenon indicates that mobile phone usage is contributing to the public sphere and in some instances is circumventing official repression or inadequate information (Gordon, 2007). The mobile phone is challenging conventional and official sources of information. However, national public sphere could not satisfy the citizens want to discuss international issues. Even though people could utilize telephones and mobile phones to make international audio calls, it is so expensive that only a few rich people could afford it especially in poor regions.

Therefore, with the development of high technology and the modernization of society, Internet was emerging. It firstly used in 1969 in the United States under ARPA. Then it was used widely in the world. The Internet has shifted the debate from the national domain to the global debate. Accordingly, the public sphere as the space of debate on public affairs has also shifted from the national to the global and is increasingly constructed around global communication networks. Internet is becoming the transnational public sphere from then on.

The Internet changed the way of communication. It makes life much easier. “Different media technologies have always been implicated in the spatiotemporal relations of social order and urban form” (Mcquire, 2011：140). Accordingly, public sphere has changed dramatically. Taking a poisoning case in 1990s in China as an example, 19 years ago, Zhu Ling, a talented musician and chemistry student at China’s prestigious Tsinghua University, was poisoned by thallium. At that time, Internet was used in China on a small scale, which is including Tsinghua University. At first, Zhu Ling emerged from a coma weeks. Later, she was partially paralyzed and nearly blind, her faculties reduced to those of a child (New York Times, 2013). Zhu Ling was sent to the hospital in Beijing many times. However, local doctors were mystified and cannot determine cause of her symptoms. Some friends of Zhu Ling decided to email foreign doctors in developed countries such as the United States, Canada and The U.K. They wrote the detailed situation and then translated it into English. They used the Internet in the School of Technology of Tsinghua University to send all the emails. Fortunately, they got the reply after few days and weeks. More and more foreign doctors thought Zhu ling was poisoned by deadly chemical “thallium”.

This is a typical example in the beginning of the information times. The Internet makes the public sphere from a national to a transnational debate. Zhu Ling’s friends and the foreign doctors communicated by email via the Internet to discuss the specific situation to help her get recovery. Internet has influenced the public sphere from national to transnational online space.

As the development of Internet, social media platform is appearing. The most popular social media platform may be Twitter and Facebook in western countries. When Facebook and Twitter emerging in America, people all over the world begin to utilize this lovely social communication tool and most of them indulged in Facebook and Twitter. Using Twitter to read everyday news is a new way of communication because you could see all the news you are interested in. And it is a global media platform (only four countries could not use it) which different people from different countries could post any tweet in his own page. Individuals can contact each other even though they are not in the same country or same place via Internet. They discuss issues and present their opinions by Twitter and share their happiness and sadness by Facebook. They know each other well by their Facebook. The Internet has a great impact on public sphere, making public sphere from physical to virtual.

Furthermore, A great number of people begin to know about other countries’ culture and advanced technology; therefore, they want to go abroad to learn the new things. Of course, this phenomenon promotes the movement of transnational public sphere. Because they need to learn a foreign public culture and in the meantime, they still keep their own public culture. “New information and communication technologies, including rapid long-distance transportation and computer networks, allow global networks to selectively connect anyone and anything throughout the world” (Castells 2008:81). In this sense, Internet affected the movement of public sphere greatly.

In the process of Chinese public sphere’s development, Weibo is a very crucial factor contributes to it. Weibo changes the form of the public sphere in China. Although Weibo mainly focus on the Chinese language including mandarin and cantonese but also could use any other languages such as English, a number of foreign celebrities also open their Weibo account and communicate with their Chinese fans. This means Weibo is not only a national social media platform but also it is a transnational social media platform. The most remarkable example is Kevin Michael Rudd, who was the 26th Prime Minister of Australia from 2007 to 2010 and the Leader of the Labor Party from 2006 to 2010, also has his own Weibo account and it’s officially certified by the real name. Some other examples such as an increasing number of Korean movie stars also use Weibo.

For instance, another poisoned case in this year in Shanghai, where a medical student Huang Yang at the prestigious Fudan University was accused of spiking the water of his roommate with a toxic chemical (New york Times, 2013). It was discussed widely in Sina Weibo and Tianya BBS (bulletin board site). And then it inspired Zhu Ling’s case. The Zhu ling case happened in 19 years ago, but has again become so blazing hot on Chinese social media and becomes the center of media attention in China. One of Zhu ling’s friends, Bei Zhicheng, who was used the Internet to send emails to foreign doctors wrote the detailed experience of Zhu Ling’s case and posted it on his Weibo page. Then it was forwarded neatly seventy thousand times by Chinese Internet users. Then Huang yang’s and Zhu Ling’s cases were reported by many foreign media agencies such as New York times, The Wall Street Journal，Reuter 's News Agency and France Press Agency etc in May, 2013. It was different than nineteen years ago. A little national media reported Zhu Ling case at that moment and only a few domestic groups heard about it. For this reason, in the past two decades, public sphere has changed dramatically not only in China but also in other countries.
Because of the advent of Internet, the media freedom of discussion is better than that of before, especially in some developing countries such as China. In the past, if one person discusses some negative aspect about Chinese Communist Party, he or she may be under arrest by CCP. Fortunately, the digital media’s appearing changed this situation. People do not need to present this opinions face to face, they could utilize various of media platforms such as Weibo, Renren (Chinese Facebook), QQ and so on. However, Chinese citizen still cannot log on Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. And nowadays the Chinese government still wants to control opinion on public affairs but it would not be as the same as in the past times. Therefore, Chinese government made many rules about discussing in online public sphere. “A series of new laws and regulations were launched seeking to restrict discussion on forums and on other domains. The restricting policies posed negative influence on the development of online public sphere” (Wang and Bates, 2008:10). Chinese government control really prevents the development of public sphere. There is a great barrier between domestic and international public sphere.

The new republic magazine reported Zhu ling’s case starting with a famous Chinese actress Yao Chen’s microblogging site Sina Weibo Weibo who has 45 million followers posted the following message in May 4 “Nineteen years ago, the young Zhu Ling was poisoned. Nineteen years later, this name has again been poisoned”(New Republic, 2013) to explain Chinese government censorship in online public sphere. This case has again become so blazing hot on Chinese social media. And many Chinese people have long believed Sun Wei, Zhu Ling’s roommate and only major suspect in the case got off scot free because her uncle and grandfather were powerful communist officials, which was affected widely discussion in online public sphere. Some rumors even claim that her grandfather asked his old friend, former Chinese president Jiang Zemin, for help (Nwes.com, 2013). However, after a few days on 4 May 2013, when you searched for Zhu Ling’s name on Sina weibo you learn that according to Chinese cencoeship, the results cannot be displayed. Even “thallium” has become a sensitive word, as are other words connected to the case (New Republic, 2013). Hence, an online petition was submitted to the White House’s “We the People” platform imploring the American government to intervene in the case, which has garnered more than 150,000 signatures (New York Times, 2013). The Obama administration will review the case and issue a response (News.com, 2013).

Online media platform totally changed the public sphere. Zhu Ling’s case is a domestic case that should be solved by national authority. It was happened nearly 20 years ago but the Internet was not so developed at that time. Therefore, there was no foreign media even a little national media reported this case. Only a few groups discussed this case on some national public sphere. However, nowadays, due to the high technology Internet, this national case has widely discussed in the international public sphere. This example is reflecting the transformation of public sphere with the development of Internet. It was only discussed in domestic public sphere 19 years ago but nowadays, it is aroused the worldwide attention. The public sphere is from national to transnational because of the online media platform.

Facebook or Weibo represents Web 2.0 mediascape. And now, it begins to enter Web 3.0 mediascape. However, as the extension of digital media, many problems are appearing and cannot be ignored. “David Lyon (2001) argued that the society of strangers creates the need for technological tokens of trust, thus laying the conditions for the emergency of surveillance society” (Mcquire, 2011：142). It points out the surveillance society is no more need to depend on the police functions. It emerges in the connection of the demands for economical “flexibility”. For this reason, trust may become a barrier for the movement of transnational public sphere. For example, non-official surveillance society may lead to scare. But if without surveillance, it is unsafe to use credit cards, passwords and PINs. Nearly every year in China, as known the “International Day for Protecting Consumers ' Rights Day” always reported some sites were not worth to trust. They utilize customer’s personal information to make profit. In addition, many sites are still at the crook of malicious code into a more even starting shamelessly page of the site, making XX site partners or distributors to confuse consumers under the banner. Consequence, it may restraint the movement of public sphere from national to transnational.

Conclusion
In the process of the development of media platform, public sphere as the representative of media platform has moved form a psychical space to a virtual space in the world, including China. Also, media platform influenced the movement from a national to a transnational public sphere. In the past, public sphere is a real place such as coffeehouse and salons, which need people to discuss political affairs face to face. Then, as mass media appeared at that moment, media platforms are becoming public sphere. The traditional mass media such as newspapers are the national public sphere. However, at that time, there was nearly no transnational public sphere that limited the communication between countries. Furthermore, the electronic media such as televisions, radio as well as cameras, makes public sphere much more private than that of before. These kinds of media platform mainly focus on the domestic affairs, but also individuals could watch some foreign programs or events by television. National public sphere begin to transform to transnational public sphere because of the development of high technology. Finally, with the advent of Internet, new media is developing dramatically. Of course, public sphere changed dramatically. Online space and online communication are attracting a number of people to use. It makes people connect with each other closely.

In China, the transformation of public sphere from national to transnational also has three steps. First of all, media as the CCP’ mouthpiece, and then the traditional media such as newspapers, television programs, and radios becomes domestic public sphere. As the Internet came into mainland China, the most remarkable change is that public sphere transformed from physical space to virtual space. Compared with the traditional mass media, the decentralized, hard-to-censer Internet could break the strict limitations in Chinese media. Also, during the globalization process, many countries engaged in connecting with other countries in the world.

Although media platform and public sphere changed dramatically in these past years, and public sphere transformed successfully from national to international area, there are still emerging some problems such as online safety. In brief, as we live in a globalized, interdependent world, we need to develop a global public sphere around the global networks of communication to satisfy the increasing demands. However, we still need to try to avoid and resolve the problems in this process.

References：
Andrew Jacobs 2013, New York Times, viewed 13 May 2013 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/11/world/asia/zhu-ling-case-re-emerges-unleashing-chinese-fury.html?pagewanted=all Asen, R 1999, ‘Toward a Normative Conception of Difference in Public Deliberation’, Argumentation and Advocacy, vol. 25, Winter, pp 115–129

Bates, Benjamin, J. (1989). ‘Evolving to an Information Society: Issues and Problems’. The Information Society: Economic, Social, and Structural Issues, pp. 15-28.

Bates, Benjamin J. (1990). ‘Information systems and society: Potential impacts of alternative structures.’ Telecommunications Policy, vol.14, no.2, pp151-158.

Boyd, Barrett, O. (1995). ‘Conceptualizing the “public sphere”’. Approaches to media, pp. 186-192.

Castells, M 2008 ‘the New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance’. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 2008 vol. 616, no. 1 pp78-93

Dahlgren, P & Sparks, C 1991. ‘Communication and citizenship: Journalism and the public sphere in the new media age’, Psychology Press, London.

Dahlgren, P 1995. ‘Television and the public sphere: Citizenship, democracy and the media’. SAGE Press.

Dai, X 2002. ‘Towards a digital economy with Chinese characteristics?’ New Media & Society, vol. 4, no.2, pp141-162.

Emily Parker, 2013, News Republic viewed on 7 May 2013 http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113116/zhu-ling-attempted-murder-case-weibo# Fraser, N 1992. ‘Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy’. Social Text, No. 25/26, pp. 56-80

Gan, X 1994. Debates contribute to the development of the journalistic science. Journal of Communication, vol. 44, no.3, pp38-51.

Habermas, J 1989. ‘The structural transformation of the public sphere’. The MIT Press, United States.

Habermas, J 2001. ‘The public sphere: An encyclopedia article’. Media and cultural studies: Key Work pp. 102-108.

Hauser, Gerard (june 1998), ‘Vernacular Dialogue and the Rhetoricality of Public Opinion’, Communication Monographs, vol.65, no.2, pp83–107

John Ross’ weibo: http://weibo.com/u/2559830984

Liu, Q &McCormick, B. ‘The Media and the Public Sphere in Contemporary China’.

Li, XP. 2002. ‘Focus (Jiaodian Fangtan) and the Changes in the Chinese Television Industry’. Journal of Contemporary China, vol.11, no.30, pp17-34.

McQuire,S.(2011) ‘The Dilemma of Public Sphere in Cites on the Move’. Aether: journal of Media Geography Vol.19, fall, pp137-151.

McQuire, S. (2011) ‘Rethinking Media Events: Large Screens, Public Space Broadcasting and Beyond’, New Media and Society vol.12, no.4, pp 567-582

News.com, 2013, viewed on 7 May 2013 http://newsle.com/article/0/74458548/ Van Cuilenburg, J. 1999. On competition, access and diversity in media, old and new. New Media & Society, vol.1, no.2, pp183-207.

Wang, C Z, &Bates, B 2008 ‘Online Public Sphere and Democracy in China’

Zhan, Li. ‘Will the Internet Form the Public Sphere in China?’ Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics. Vol.2, no.2 pp: 81-86.

Andrew Jacobs 2013, New York Times, viewed 13 May 2013 http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/11/world/asia/zhu-ling-case-re-emerges-unleashing-chinese-fury.html?pagewanted=all

References: Bates, Benjamin J. (1990). ‘Information systems and society: Potential impacts of alternative structures.’ Telecommunications Policy, vol.14, no.2, pp151-158. Boyd, Barrett, O. (1995). ‘Conceptualizing the “public sphere”’. Approaches to media, pp. 186-192. Castells, M 2008 ‘the New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance’ Emily Parker, 2013, News Republic viewed on 7 May 2013 http://www.newrepublic.com/article/113116/zhu-ling-attempted-murder-case-weibo# Hauser, Gerard (june 1998), ‘Vernacular Dialogue and the Rhetoricality of Public Opinion’, Communication Monographs, vol.65, no.2, pp83–107 John Ross’ weibo: http://weibo.com/u/2559830984 Li, XP. 2002. ‘Focus (Jiaodian Fangtan) and the Changes in the Chinese Television Industry’. Journal of Contemporary China, vol.11, no.30, pp17-34. McQuire,S.(2011) ‘The Dilemma of Public Sphere in Cites on the Move’. Aether: journal of Media Geography Vol.19, fall, pp137-151. McQuire, S. (2011) ‘Rethinking Media Events: Large Screens, Public Space Broadcasting and Beyond’, New Media and Society vol.12, no.4, pp 567-582 News.com, 2013, viewed on 7 May 2013