Digital Democracy in the ‘Public sphere’ today

Many people can agree that social media has been part of our life and as we know now with the modern era people have been more dependent on technology and social media. According to Kruse et al, a study by Pew found that about half of the U.S. population uses social media, including 80 percent of people 18–29 years old. Social media platforms are popular sites, attracting millions of users who connect digitally. This has prompted some to argue that social media has promoted the return of Habermas’s ([1989] 1991) public sphere. (cited in Kruse et al. 2018)

A public sphere is now a place where people can connect with one another. It is a place where people can share opinions, spread knowledge to one another, and also spread any important information with each other. The public sphere is defined as “a place where ‘private people come together as a public’ to use reason to further critical knowledge which, in turn, leads to political change. However, the public sphere was barely hard to thrive in modernity due to money influence in mass media interest Habermas ([1989] 1991, cited in Kruse et al. 2018).

Digital democracy is when political communication is applied both online and offline. Having to communicate with people without going out is sometimes more practical. The public sphere really helps people to communicate with each other even if they live further away, not only that people would bother having to pay a lot of money to pay for any transportation. But with this comes limitations and boundaries. 

The internet could sometimes be unsafely filled with restriction, control, and manipulated information that could lead to misunderstanding. The new digital era can benefit a lot of people but with these people should be more aware of how we use the internet. People often get offended very easily that’s why the internet creates limitations to what we have to say online but with this, it takes away our right to speak freely on our opinion. Gallagher (2017:para.10) argued, “How are we ever going to have an authentic, meaningful conversation about sensitive issues of race, gender, religion, sexual orientation, cultural difference, and values if we can’t talk about what’s on our minds?”. With various misconceptions and public deception, this can then lead to the division which can cause chaos offline causing the government to interfere.

References:

Hacker KL and Van Dijk J A.G.M. (2000), ‘What Is Digital Democracy?’, Digital Democracy: Vision and Reality, Sage, pp. 1-9.

Huffpost (6 December 2017) ‘The Downside of Political Correctness: Authentic Speech In The Age of Trump’, Huffpost, 11 December 2020.

Kruse LM, Norris DR and Flinchum JR (2018) ‘Social Media as a Public Sphere? Politics on Social Media’, The Sociological Quarterly, 59(1):62-84, DOI: 10.1080/00380253.2017.1383143