Rise of the bourgeois public sphere
In The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere Habermas argued that in the 17th and 18th centuries English coffee houses, French salons, German table societies and the periodical press created spaces where educated citizens debated politics and literature. The force of argument counted more than rank, access was open in principle, and matters once monopolised by church and state became open to discussion.
Institutional criteria
- Disregard of status: social rank is bracketed in favour of argument.
- Problematising common concerns: topics once interpreted by authority are opened to debate.
- Inclusivity: anyone able to read and argue may in principle take part.
Structural transformation
With the welfare state the line between state and society blurred, and commercial mass media turned a culture-debating public into a culture-consuming one. Habermas called the replacement of critical publicity by public relations and managed opinion "refeudalisation".
Later work and critiques
In The Theory of Communicative Action and Between Facts and Norms Habermas recast the public sphere as a communication network rooted in the lifeworld and a basis for deliberative democracy. Nancy Fraser and others argued that women and workers were excluded and that multiple counterpublics exist. Whether the internet and social media widen or fragment the public sphere remains debated.
References
- Habermas, J. (1989). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere (T. Burger, Trans.). MIT Press. (Original work published 1962)
- Habermas, J. (1996). Between Facts and Norms (W. Rehg, Trans.). MIT Press.
- Fraser, N. (1990). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. Social Text, 25/26, 56-80.
- Calhoun, C. (Ed.). (1992). Habermas and the Public Sphere. MIT Press.