Community broadcasting and the enclosure of the public sphere

One of the normative tenets of the Habermasian public sphere is that it should be an open and universally accessible forum. In Australia, one way of achieving this is the provision for community broadcasting in the Broadcasting Services Act. A closer examination of community broadcasting, however, suggests practices that contradict the idea of an open and accessible public sphere. Community broadcasting organizations regulate access to their media assets through a combination of formal and informal structures. This suggests that the public sphere can be understood as a resource, and that community broadcasting organizations can be analysed as ‘commons regimes’. This approach reveals a fundamental paradox inherent in the public sphere: access, participation and the quality of discourse in the public sphere are connected to its enclosure, which limits membership and participation through a system of rules and norms that govern the conduct of a group. By accepting the view that a public sphere is governed by property rights, it follows that an open and universally accessible public sphere is neither possible nor desirable.

The mirror-ball effect: Investigating channels, messages and participation levels

Journalists have always used equipment which has been generally available in the communities in which they worked. This has been a result both of economy and necessity, since they found they had to connect with their audiences using means that were available to the audience, not just to the sender. Newspapers sold on street corners in the very early media days; SMS and email have become the rule for the early 21st century. This development also admits the possibility of the roles of the communication professional and the community merging during the “public journalism” process, and has become most recently evident in the areas around the Bay of Bengal, struck by the tsunami on December 26, 2004, especially in the Indonesian province of Banda Aceh, and in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, where tiny portable radios, featuring solar panels and hand-cranked dynamos, have suddenly become part of a vital news media channel. In this article participant-observation and personal interview techniques are used to record and compare many of the digital channels used by news and information senders up to 2005. It also investigates the level of genuine participation which these new technologies have brought to the communications process.