Page 89 - Culture Technology Communication

74 Barbara Becker and Josef Wehner

interests or activities. Looking at processes on the Internet, we sel-
dom find discussions about global perspectives and topics which are
relevant to the society in general. Rather, participants concentrate
on very particular themes and more private needs (see Helmers et
al. 1998). It is worth noting the results of empirical studies accord-
ing to which electronic networks tend to segment the flow of com-
munication (for example in mailing lists, newsgroups, and chat
rounds). As it is difficult to find transcontextual perspectives and
themes, most of the participants are limited to their specific dis-
courses and do not even try to open them up to a more general dis-
course. In addition, electronic contacts are dependent upon a
minimum amount of the users’ assumptions and interests (compare
Baym 1995; Jones 1995). In comparison with a mass public, the
participants in an on-line public need to have specific insider
knowledge and often, they show a relatively high level of homo-
geneity of their interests and abilities. If electronic networks al-
ready support existing structures and activities, they also reach a
high level of organization (compare Wellman 1997).
In addition to this, everybody can present his or her points of view
in his or her own language, which is separate from the censored and
generalized code which regulates the way in which information should
be presented in mass media (and is presented by journalists). Accord-
ingly, the Internet shows not only an overwhelming multitude of top-
ics but also a high diversity of special codes of expression. For
example, participants in so-called virtual communities demarcate
their activities from other groups by elaborating idiosyncratic styles of
communication and specific language codes (Becker and Mark 1999;
Poster 1995). They use the Internet as a public space for articulating
their differences. First of all, “THE citizen” who converses with other
citizens on the Internet does not exist. Rather, there are the represen-
tatives of special organizations, groups or social milieus—such as
experts, old people, homosexuals, women, men, children, youngsters—
who talk about their particular interests on the Internet.
Hence, electronic networks underline the internal differentia-
tion of society by generating polycontextural communication struc-
tures. This new media technology thus fits in with current trends of
further segmentation of society, because it strengthens the dissemi-
nation of pluralistic and incommensurable discourses instead of sup-
porting the generation of commonly shared beliefs. So, the electronic
communication in the Internet may be regarded as an example of a
postmodern culture of communication. Paradoxically, the demands
for equality in the world of communication promote the formation of