Page 95 - Communication Theory Media, Technology and Society
P. 95

Holmes-03.qxd  2/15/2005  10:31 AM  Page 78





                    78  COMMUNICA TION THEORY
                        However, in media societies, where the geographic and kinship ties
                    of the parish, local neighbourhood or industrial slum have virtually
                    disappeared, individuals have historically become very heavily dependent
                    on media of many kinds to acquire a sense of belonging and attachment
                    to others. The situation is one of separation and unity. Individuals are sep-
                    arated at a geographic level, locked away in their housing-allotment
                    or -unit fortresses, but united on scales of city or nation in their attachment
                    to forms of media. Ironically, the marketing calls for consumers to ‘get
                    connected’ and ‘travel on the Internet’ instead of being ‘stuck at home’ are
                    an exact reproduction of the social and urban consequences of broadcast
                    technologies. Individuals are told they can interact to overcome the
                    tyranny and restraints of broadcast, but they do so only by reinforcing the
                    domestic conditions of their atomized existence.
                        The question of whether interaction, once it is reduced to the electron-
                    ically mediated and technologically extended kinds of access to communi-
                    cation which are enabled from the home, constitutes participation in a
                    public sphere is a pivotal one to ask in relation to CMC. Certainly the
                    private/public question becomes extremely vexed on the Internet. As Poster
                    (1997) suggests:

                       If ‘public’ discourse exists as pixels on screens generated at remote loca-
                       tions by individuals one has never met and probably will never meet, as it
                       is in the case of the Internet with its ‘virtual communities’, ‘electronic
                       cafés’, bulletin boards, e-mail, computer conferencing and even video con-
                       ferencing, then how is it to be distinguished from ‘private’ letters, printface
                       and so forth? (219–20)

                    We could add to Poster’s observation the fact that virtual meeting places
                    are replicated in physical form in cybercafés and video-cafés. Symbolically
                    as well as functionally, the cybercafé is extremely interesting. It strongly
                    re-affirms the idea that the cellular network basis of gaining access to the
                    public sphere predominates, where even one of the strongest institutions
                    of embodied public life can be remade in terms of CMC. Nobody meets
                    face-to-face at a cybercafé, as the face-to-screen interaction precludes dialogic
                    contact in any form other than the electronic.


                    Problems with the public cybersphere thesis

                    The success of any argument claiming a special role for the Internet in
                    the constitution of a new public sphere rests on its ability to establish a
                    practical/imaginary unity in which all participants have equal opportunity
                    for ‘observation’ and communication. This postulated imaginary unity, best
                    known in the phrase ‘virtual community’, seldom reconciles itself with the
                    fact that the Internet is not at all technically homogeneous and is segmented
                    into quite a range of properties and capabilities which each carry different
                    sociological and communicative potentials and effects.
   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100