Conceptualizing mediatization: Is `Have your say´ a kind of transnational public sphere for public deliberation?

António Alberto Castro Baía Reis

Abstract


The present essay aims to reflect on the questions of how the BBC news website discussion forum Have your say is organized and to what extent it can be considered as a transnational or global public sphere for public deliberation. In order to do so, one must firstly look at this discussion forum in terms of its structure, so that we can comprehend in a descriptive and formal way what is Have your say. Then, to try to understand and suggest what exactly Have your say is in terms of the possibility of being a global public sphere for public deliberation, one must tackle into a reflection that encompasses the concepts of transnational/global public sphere (Habermas, 1996; Castells, 2008), public deliberation (Pateman, 1970; Drvzek, 2000; Abelson et al., 2003), as well as some mediation/mediatization paradigms. The goal of this essay is to provide an objective academic reflection by attempting to frame this specific online phenomenon within the concepts above mentioned, to ultimately argue and prove that online discussion forums such as Have your say are by definition ambivalent. 


Keywords


Mediatization; Public Deliberation; Transnational Public Sphere; Online Discussion Forums

Full Text:

PDF

References


Abelson, J., Forest, P.G., Eyles, J., Smith, P., Martin, E., Gauvin, F.P., (2003). Deliberations about deliberative methods: issues in the design and evaluation of public participation processes. Soc. Sci. Med. 57, 239–251.

BBC (2016). House Rules. Have your say. BBC News. Retrieved from: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/help/4176520.stm

Castells, M. (2008). The New Public Sphere: Global Civil Society, Communication Networks, and Global Governance. ANNALS, AAPSS, 616, March 2008. Retrieved from: ann.sagepub.com at b-on: 01100 Universidade do Porto on October 23, 2016

Dahlberg, L., (2001). Computer-mediated communication and the public sphere: a critical analysis. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 7 (1), Retrieved from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol7/issue1/dahlberg.html

Dryzek, J.S., (2000). Deliberative Democracy and Beyond. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.

Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Habermas, J. (1980). Reason and the Rationalization of Society. The Theory of Communicative Action, English translation by Thomas McCarthy, Boston: Beacon Press. 1984

Hjarvard, S. (2013). The Mediatization of Culture and Society. London: Routledge.

Papacharissi, Z., (2002). The virtual sphere: the Internet as a public sphere. New Media Soc. 4, 9–27.

Pateman, C., (1970). Participation and Democratic Theory. Cambridge University Press.

Price, V., Cappella, J., (2002). Online deliberation and its influence: the electronic dialogue project in campaign 2000. IT Soc. 1 (1), 303–329.

Quintelier, E., Vissers, S., (2008). The effect of Internet use on political participation: an analysis of survey results for 16-year-olds in Belgium. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 26 (4), 411–427.

Shah, D.V., Cho, J., Eveland, W.J., Kwak, N., (2005). Information and expression in a digital age: modeling internet effects on civic participation. Commun. Res. 32 (5), 531–555.

Silverstone, R. (2007). Media and Morality: On the Rise of the Mediapolis. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Sunstein, C. R. (2001). Republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Thurman, N. (2008) Forums for Citizen Journalists?: adoption of user generated content initiatives by online news media. New Media & Society 10(1), pp. 139-57.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17951/ms.2017.1.23
Data publikacji: 2017-11-13 07:43:57
Data złożenia artykułu: 2017-01-23 17:55:58

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2017 António Alberto Castro Baía Reis

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.