Is Habermas on Twitter? Social Media and the Public Sphere

Jürgen Habermas’s concept of the public sphere remains a major building block for our understanding of public communication and deliberation. Yet ‘the’ public sphere is a construct of its time, and the mass media-dominated environment which it describes has given way to a considerably more fragmented and complex system of distinct and diverse, yet interconnected and overlapping publics that represent different themes, topics, and approaches to mediated communication. This chapter argues that moving beyond the orthodox model of the public sphere to a more dynamic and complex conceptual framework provides the opportunity to more clearly recognise the varying forms that public communication can take, especially online. Unpacking the traditional public sphere into a series of public sphericules and micro-publics, none of which are mutually exclusive but which co-exist, intersecting and overlapping in multiple forms, is crucial for understanding the ongoing structural transformation of ‘the’ public sphere.

Agenda-Setting Revisited: Social Media and Sourcing in Mainstream Journalism

In political journalism, the battle over agenda-setting between journalists and their sources has been described using many metaphors and concepts. Herbert Gans saw it as a dance where the two parties competed for leadership, arguing that sources usually got the lead. We address the question of how social media, in particular Twitter, contribute to media agenda-building and agenda-setting by looking at how tweets are sourced in election campaign coverage in Australia, Norway and Sweden. Our findings show that the popularity of elite political sources is a common characteristic across all countries and media. Sourcing from Twitter reinforces the power of the political elites to set the agenda of the news media – they are indeed “still leading the dance”. Twitter content travels to the news media as opinions, comments, announcements, factual statements, and photos. Still, there are variations that must be explained both by reference to different political and cultural characteristics of the three countries, as well as by the available resources and journalistic profiles of each media outlet.

National media regulations in an age of convergent media: Beyond globalisation, neo-liberalism and internet freedom theories

There is a widely held view that the nation-state has become less central to media and communications policy over the last two decades. As Jan van Cuilenberg and Denis McQuail (2003, p. 181) observed in their overview of trends in communications policy-making, 'the old normative media policies have been challenged and policy-makers are searching for a new communications policy paradigm'. There are characteristically five factors put forward as to why the nation-state has become less central to media in the twenty-first century

Communication and Political Crisis: Media, Politics and Governance in a Globalized Public Sphere

Communication and Political Crisis explores the role of the global media in a period of intensifying geopolitical conflict. Through case studies drawn from domestic and international political crises such as the conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine, leading media scholar Brian McNair argues that the digitized, globalized public sphere now confronted by all political actors has produced new opportunities for social progress and democratic reform, as well as new channels for state propaganda and terrorist spectaculars such as those performed by the Islamic State and Al Qaeda. In this major work, McNair argues that the role of digital communication will be crucial in determining the outcome of pressing global issues such as the future of feminism and gay rights, freedom of speech and media, and democracy itself.