Page 94 - Culture Technology Communication

Electronic Networks and Civil Society 79

normally an Internet message cannot reach an unlimited number of
people in the same form and at the same time. Therefore users never
know if they have reached a mass public or not. Hence, electronic net-
works cannot replace the mass media’s role as supporting specific
kinds of selection and inclusion. Computer networks even seem to
threaten a public based on an orientation towards generalized prod-
ucts of meaning. All participants can become active providers, but this
inevitably leads to “parceling out” of the electronic space. Through net-
working, more and more participants have a voice; but because of the
increasing number of participants there is less and less time to listen.
This problem can only be solved by a new asymmetry of speaker and
listener roles, or through a limitation of the communication configu-
rations (Helmers et al 1998). Therefore electronic networks do not
offer a functional equivalent to the mass media.
So far, the Internet lacks the ability to dramatize problems in a
way that makes political systems take notice of them. There is no
strategy for clustering different perspectives and discourses so that
they may represent transcontextual themes and perspectives that
could influence the process of political decision-making. So, at least
for the moment, mass media cannot be replaced by electronic com-
munication networks, as only mass media can guarantee this kind of
transcontextual clustering of topics and is able to force political re-
actions. But we assume that the Internet increases the opportunities
available to citizens for expressing their interests. Considering this,
the Internet will influence political public opinion to a large extent,
because new domains of discussion and new discourse forms will en-
large current ways of generating public opinion.
At this point, it seems appropriate to refer again to Habermas
(1992, 435), who distinguishes between a kind of general public opin-
ion generated by mass media, and a different form of partial public
opinion which is less formal. Partial public spheres are character-
ized by variable non-governmental and non-economical associations
and assemblies, (i.e. community pressure groups, political associa-
tions, etc.). In comparison with other political actors such as political
parties, these grassroots movements are concentrated on specific is-
sues; they are timely, restricted and the ties between their members
are relatively weak. Together they constitute the so-called civil soci-
ety (compare with Cohen and Areto 1992; Frankenberg 1996; Hall
1995) Each of these pre-institutional associations creates a specific
public sphere. Debates on this level of articulating and defining po-
litical issues often contradict the general public opinion produced by
mass media. These partial publics therefore can be understood as an
important space of resonance for the “real” problems and interests of