Dylan Wohlenhaus-Midterm Paper: Habermas/Jenkins

Contrast of Jurgen Habermas and Henry Jenkins.

Working for a television station a newspaper or a magazine is slowly becoming one of the many ways any citizen can express their opinion. In a society when those were the only forms of medium your voice could be heard citizen journalism and mass political movements are rooting themselves in the basements of the average citizen’s home. Participatory media has to the dismay of politicians, and many news figures exploded with the internet, specifically YouTube and bloggers. In this article I will explore how Jurgen Habermas’ Public Sphere is an open door to participatory media as stated by Henry Jenkins.

The public sphere has come a long way since the early middle ages of Europe. What we now conceder “Public” is a far contrast from what Habermas outlines in his history, writing his article in 1964 a few things have changed but some display an overlap. Jurgen Habermas explains the coming of age of the “public sphere”. It was people in power of a state and politicians; the public are the rulers and make up what the public sphere while the private citizens are just that, private and do not rule. Habermas and Jenkins show a similar pattern in opening their statements. I think Henry Jenkins begins where Habermas left off. Jenkins opens his chapter Photoshop for Democracy by talking about how a new culture was emerging in the public. Television was becoming the main form of medium in the 60’s but “the revolution wouldn’t be televised”. Much like a narrow public sphere mainly consisting of political figures before newspapers, there was a counter culture in which their views and ideas were not transmitted in the main stream media or public sphere. These unheard views cultivated (in the case of Habermas) participatory media like newspapers in like manner Jenkins states folk songs, posters, people’s radio and comics became the counter cultures voice.

Habermas talks about how newspapers revolutionized the public sphere. They became leaders of public opinion and “weapons of political parties” when the public sphere was becoming more widespread. Jenkins and Habermas are both concerned with the issues of how public opinion shapes public policy and political power. Again they are both looking at it in different eras, Jenkins lives in a convergence culture and Habermas is seeing the rise of a convergence culture. Using newspapers as a political took became essential when they became the primary medium. They were tools of opinion. If you were a politician and you were listening to the masses you would pick up a newspaper. They gave people a voice and most importantly in a democratic state politicians or the “public” better listen to the “private” if they wanted to seek re-election. News editors became the dealer of public opinion and not just the spreader of news and current events. Jenkins states points similar. Media convergence and the internet made the political process participatory. In the case of the 2004 presidential election Howard Dean and his staff utilized the power of the internet as a fund raising tool. They also used it to create rallies and listen and learn from what people were saying (much like newspapers coming of age). In each case the public sphere becomes more participatory, no longer having politicians the rich and powerful or the ones who are on television making their voice the only ones heard. The role of participatory politics is Jenkins over arching question, does participatory have implications of having a negative effect on politics? Coming back to Howard Dean, his use of the participatory media was a huge boos for his campaign. But in the end participatory media was also the demise of his campaign. Shouting with passion the video of him in Iowa was all over the internet and photos such as the one in Jenkins’ book of Dean grabbing Janet Jackson’s “wardrobe malfunction” made people make him out as a joke.

The public sphere is losing itself among the convergence. When Habermas outlines the February revolution in France and the Chartist movement in England, you can see it correlate with what Jenkins says in Fans, Consumers, Citizens. With Habermas, the public body “Lost not only its exclusivity; it lost in addition to the coherence created”. In Jenkins’ case, the Super Bowl ad created by Moveon.org was operating within a political public sphere, more liberal than conservative and it was refused air time by CBS. Well that didn’t make any difference and Jenkins states that Moveon.org had the intention of it being denied. Because of the controversy stirred up on why this ad was refused it was played anyway on media outlets and given wide news coverage. Jenkins states, “Historically networks have refused to sell airtime for issue oriented ads, special interest groups.” My point here is Habermas and Jenkins both agree that the exclusivity of a public body, or the big network three is being lost because of media convergence and the public sphere is just getting bigger, because Habermas’ private sector is becoming a modern era public. The public Vs. The Private sector gap is closing forcing newspapers out of business, network news shows declining in ratings and politicians every move being scrutinized. The mainstream media usually picks up what is online, or user generated. If it’s making waves in society then it’s usually broadcasted through news outlets, again convergence.

Media participation and media convergence have been an inevitable revolution in our society. So many stuck in their old ways are meeting it with resistance that it’s threatening the public sphere was Habermas once knew it. It is both good and bad, in a sense that nothing we really do is private anymore and controlling the message becomes more difficult. Habermas and Jenkins don’t outwardly agree with each other, but if you are able to understand the media revolution that is going on today and the revolution that Habermas has researched, you being to find more similarities than differences.

Works Cited.

Jenkins, Henry. (2006). Convergence Culture: Where Old and New Media Collide. New York University Press: New York and London.

Habermas, Jurgen. The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia Article (1964).