Critical Examination Of The Media Role Within The Public Sphere

Page 1 Stanley

Daniel

Critically examine the role of the media in the contemporary public sphere

When undertaking a critical examination, it is important to first examine the context of that which is being discussed. What actually is the public sphere? What or whom does it represent? Answers to these questions are necessary before one can effectively break down the media role in such a complex structure as the public sphere. The integral parts of the public sphere have undergone changes in recent decades and this shall be addressed, alongside the changing media both technologically and ideologically throughout this period of recent transition. Whilst there are many influencing factors over inclusivity or exclusivity of individuals to the public sphere, recent changes have rendered previous models ineffective. With the ever expanding plethora of internet based networking, blogging and news agency broadcasting, the boundaries between who is in and who is out have been somewhat blurred. This has forced a change in the way the media operate, and it is a change that is not finished. The traditional media structure is still in the process of adapting to such technological advances and according to some journalists, is on the edge of a micro-recession. I shall investigate the current influences the media has over the public sphere and will conclude by offering insight into its possible future influence. What will become of the media influence over the public sphere? Over the last 30 years, the public sphere has emerged as a ‘concept [...] which could make possible a free and legal exchange of views’(Holland: 2004.p68), which of course offers a somewhat utopian idea of everybody having access to, and input in this public sphere. Historically however, it has taken over a century to prize it from the clutches of the bourgeoisie, who have traditionally horded both access to, and production of the media that so heavily influences the topics of discussion within the public sphere. The old fashioned model of the 1

bourgeois staring down their noses at the working class still holds true to some publications, even today. In fact, the concept of everybody having a voice had not materialised until as late as the mid 90s, when the internet started to appear more consistently in the homes of the public, although primarily in the conventional ‘west’. There are, of course, parts of the globe to which internet access is not abundant, and this must be acknowledged. Still, as more people began to have access to a platform which allowed the individual to broadcast their own media, at relatively inexpensive cost, the public were given the ability to express their own opinions without the need to print, distribute and fund it. Moving forward to the most contemporary era and one can literally star their own news broadcasting website accessible to anyone with an internet connection. So it is established that the public sphere has emerged from the dark ages and entered into a more user friendly forum for public debate, but where do the media fall into such a structure? The simple answer is, of course, at the very top. It is true that all public discussion requires a focal point, a common ground, and the media provide this with their news broadcasts, soap operas and various other entertainment productions. When discussion erupts in the local salon, coffee house or even bus stop, you can be sure with relative accuracy that it will be around the happenings on Eastenders, or the latest scoop from one of the newspapers. The public now has more access to information than in previous years and in particular the events of parliament, so one could assume that public debate on a political front will be more informed and aware. However ‘the coming of the information society has failed to create a common citizenship based upon a general access of information’ (Stevenson:2002.p53). Stevenson argues that the public sphere does not hold true to utopian views of a democratic forum for debate and discussion, and in fact ‘is now subsumed into a stage managed political theatre’ (2002:p50). The idea of freedom of a public sphere as been superseded by the manipulation of politics on media as opposed to media’s ability to remain unbiased and unassuming. The use of the media

2

to generate public image within the sphere has hampered the ability of the media to present ultimate truth and un-tampered fact. Stevenson furthers this notion through the description that the public are ‘depoliticized masses are excluded from the central debates of our political culture’ (Stevenson:2002.p53). Even with the free-flow of politically based information the public sphere remains autonomous to democratic political debate. One of the explanations for this could lie in ‘compassion fatigue’ and its apparent effects on both journalists producing the stories, and the public consumption of them. The concept of compassion fatigue relies on the continuous bombardment of repetitive news stories effectively de-sensitising the audience to the magnitude of what is being presented. It means ‘becoming so used to the spectacle of dreadful events, misery or suffering that we stop noticing them’ (Tester:2001.p13). The transformation of news from information to ‘infotainment’ has resulted in the ‘commercialisation and commodification of the popular press [and] undermined their ability to act as rational centres of debate’ (Stevenson:1995.p53). Stevenson believes the constant exaggeration and manipulation of news events has rendered the popular press partially unreliable as a source of reference when discussing politics in the public sphere. Some of this sensationalist news can be due to the media assumption that ‘Joe (average) is largely incompetent to face the increasingly complex issues of the day’(Warhover:2000.p43). The necessity to keep the news interesting leads to heavily manipulation and somewhat simplification of the facts. Essentially then, the media grasp on the political facet of the public sphere is that of a monopoly, controlling the flow of information, along with the content of this flow. The extent of media control can be realised through society’s dependence on it for information, with people spending more free time with media sources than ever before. McCullagh believes ‘the mass media – particularly television - have become the cultural epicentre of our world’ (McCullagh:2002.p1) with ‘media consumption [being] the predominant activity in the domestic sphere in industrialised society, second only to work in terms of time spent’ (2002.p2). The sheer magnitude of media 3

reach into the homes of realistically 100% of western homes in one shape or form is staggering, further tightening its grip on the public sphere. Besides total relinquish of outside communication, it is inescapable as newspapers, magazines, television, radio, the internet and all other forms of media are at every junction, in every doorway, on all journeys and everything in between. With this uncompromising bombardment of media production saturating western society, there is a risk that production values have grown to outweigh political content. As Stevenson puts it ‘the public sphere has become dominated by a depthless symbolic culture that relies upon display and ceremony, rather than open democratic decision – making procedures’ (Stevenson:2002.p51). So rather than being ‘a social space where the authority of better argument could be asserted against the established status quo’ (2002.p49), it has been hijacked by those it was originally meant to free the public from. Instead of being an unmanipulated truly democratised space where all members of the public could express themselves, it has been managed into a tightly controlled zone of political bias - media at the reigns. To what extent and on what level then does ‘Joe average’ use the information provided by media outlets the world across? The statement ‘Journalism, like any other narrative which is the work of human agency is essentially ideological’ (McNair:2002.p6), would suggest that the roots of media production lie deep in the fabric of society’s ideals, and often represent those of the creator of such ideals. The media effectively teaches society how to think, feel and aspire, placing them at the forefront of the public sphere hierarchy. The workings of Stuart Hall on Encoding/Decoding (1980) allows a more in depth analysis of this subliminal broadcasting of ideals, believing ‘the moments of encoding and decoding, though only ‘relatively autonomous’ in relation to the communicative process as a whole, are determinate moments’ (Hall:1973,p167). In capitalist systems the process of media consumption is circular and by virtue of supply and demand, the audience in effect has an influence on the ideals and messages produced by journalists 4

themselves. The popularity and longevity of media productions depends on its reception by the public. Therefore, Hall would argue that as a core component of the public sphere, the media is actually influenced heavily by the members of it. Effectively, the public sphere is emperor unto itself, and the media are just a fragmented part of this structure, albeit a defining one. The true extent to the media influence on the public sphere, although difficult to quantify, is complex and more importantly, vast. Surrounding the public sphere with influences from all directions has historically allowed the media to mould and shape it whilst clouding it enough to distract the public from issues the political forces wish to be ignored. The assumption that the public are incapable of dealing with the complexity of most political issues has led to an effective ‘dumbing-down’ of their coverage, and led to a ‘de-politicized’ society. A society incapable of deconstructing political messages, and looking to the nearest media outlet to go through this process for them, allows for the political powers to manipulate public opinion with relative ease and gives power to the media to have the overall say in the same. Affording the media with such power is a dangerous notion and one that can have dramatic effects on society as a whole. With the introduction of the internet to the public forum, the world has seen a change to the very core of the public sphere, and one which has yet to find its metaphorical feet. With hyper-connectivity at the centre of most media outlets current plans for progression, the transition from physical newspapers to online platforms has begun, and is picking up speed. As yet, the media industry has yet to capitalise financially on this development but once accomplished the need for paper delivery will be redundant. With internet technologies such as Twitter, Wordpress, Facebook and many other applications, the grip the media has on the public sphere will be loosened somewhat, but it is down to the public themselves to realise this and capture a larger stake in its structural prism. Only time will tell as to the absolute ramifications of transformation

5

from hardback to ‘e-back’, but the certainty of the impact on the media influence of the public sphere will appear bruised, but not battered.

Bibliography Cottle, Simon (ed.) (2003) ‘News, Public Relations and Power’ London, Sage Garnham, Nicholas (1986) ‘The Media and the Public Sphere’, in Peter Golding, Graham Murdock, and Philip Schlesinger (eds.) ‘Communicating Politics: Mass Communications and the Political Process’, Leicester, Leicester University Press [Also in Garnham 1990] Hall, Stuart (1973) ‘Encoding/Decoding’ in durham, M.G Kellner, D.(eds) ‘Media and Cultural Studies: Keyworks’. Oxford, Blackwell Publishers Holland, Patricia (2004) ‘The Politics of the Smile’, in Cynthia Carter and Linda Steiner (eds.) ‘Media and Gender’, Maidenhead: Open University Press McCullagh, Ciaran (2002) ‘Media Power: A Sociological Introduction’ New York, Palgrave

6

McNair, Brian (1994) ‘News and Journalism in the UK’, London: Routeledge McNair, Brian (1998) ‘The Sociology of Journalism’ London, Oxford University Press Stevenson, Nick (2002) ‘Understanding Media Cultures’ London, Sage Publications Tester, Kieth (2001) ‘Compassion Fatigue and the ethics of the journalistic field’ in ‘Compassion, Morality and the Media’, Buckingham: Open University Press Warhover, Thomas A (2000) ’Public Journalism and the Press: The Virginia Pilot Experience’ Anthony J Eksterowicz and Robert N Roberts (eds.) Oxford, Rowman and Little Publishers Inc.

7