"THE VIRTUAL SPHERE" OF PAPACHARISSI

Papachrissi's explains the public sphere in the words of Jurgen Habermas as a forum separate from the public as it relates to opinion and assembly. She quotes on page 5, "Because, according to Habermas, the public sphere has been compromised to the point where its actual existence is in doubt, it is best understood as a metaphor for “a sphere which mediates between society and state in which the public organizes itself as the bearer of public opinion, accords with the principle of the public sphere – that principle of public information which once had to be fought for against the arcane politics of monarchies and which since that time has made possible the democratic control of state activities” (Habermas, 1973, p. 351)." Given this definition I see the public sphere as any communicative forum accessible to the general public (as audience as as speakers) that may include discourse surrounding local and national politics as well as social constructs such as businesses, schools, or any type of organization that operates on behalf of the public. I believe the public sphere benefits society because within this forum we are asking questions (right and wrong) and analyzing ineffective engagements.

A few pages later she makes a point about the tendency in the media towards political polarization, as opposed to thoughtful discussion, when addressing public issues. She uses the example of public opinion polls which offer narrow yes/no responses to chosen arguments, and how public leaders use this route to interact with the public sphere as opposed to an "exchange of opinions fostered by the public sphere." In the discussion on framing, via the tendency towards inflammatory discourse in the media mentioned above, Papachrissi brings to light how media functions as a perpetuation of cynicism. It is true, it doesn't take long to get bogged down by negative media loops which make you feel that solutions are unreachable. However, public spheres provide a place to express alternatives. They also offer a a vehicle for accountability. For example, to jump to online media, Express Milwaukee.com published a piece by Lisa Kaiser holding We Energies accountable for a direct contradiction they made about the benefits of solar energy. What Express Milaukee published was her questioning of a representative about this (basically exposing the BS they have been spinning in the public about why solar generation is putting economic stress on non-solar customers).

Papachrissi notes on page 12, "A new public space is not synonymous with a new public sphere, in that a virtual space simply enhances discussion; a virtual sphere should enhance democracy." As she moves into a discussion of a virtual public sphere she continues to refer back to blog forums, which reside outside of the virtual public space, and arose out of "desperation" over a lack of "distinction between public and private life" (p.15). The author also makes the point about how blogs contribute to democracy. She delineates narcissism as it relates to blogging, and how the emergence of blogs express a self-centered viewpoint that is without selfishness. "Political thoughts expressed on blogs are narcissistically motivated in that they are not created with the explicit purpose of contributing to a public sphere, the commons, or heightening civic engagement" (p.14). It is due to this sense of self-absorbed contribution to a public forum that is not selfishly motivated that democratic patterns are virtually perpetuated.