Page 204 - Communication Cultural and Media Studies The Key Concepts

PUBLIC

PROXEMICS

The semiotics of space. E. T. Hall (1973) posited that space may be
intimate (near), social (middling) or public (distant). People’s proximity
to one another will communicate their mutual status – lovers will
‘naturally’ stand nearer each other than strangers. There are reputed to
be different proxemic standards in different countries, resulting in some
nationalities gaining a reputation for aloofness (their relaxed social space
when standing is longer than an arm’s-length: ‘Swedes’) or for over-
familiarity (they habitually stand closer than arm’s-length: ‘Latins’).
Adhering to proxemic standards in a given context is a good test of
politeness; failing to do so can cause offence (invading one’s personal
space; being stand-offish) or it can be exploited (politicians and sales
reps). Proxemic codes can be observed both in behaviour and in the
organisation and architecture of public spaces, which can be
manipulated for public or commercial ends. VIPs tend to be surrounded
by more space than regular folk, a truism exploited by the organisers of
public spectacles from Nuremberg and the Olympics (think of the
winners’ podia) to Oscars night and the Presidential inauguration.

PUBLIC

Pre-dating the use of the terms nation and nationality, the ‘public’
described the population of a city-state in classical times. The people
comprising the public could gather in a single space within sight of
each other (in Greek: agora, in Roman: forum). It was here that free
citizens argued, legislated and adjudicated, both in their own interests
and on behalf on others who were not free – slaves, women,
foreigners, children.
With the growth of polities to many times the size of these classical
antecedents, the public was ‘abstracted’ or virtualised – it was either an
imagined community or could gather together only by representative
means. However, the notion of the public has survived, sustaining
public governmental, media and academic interests, among others. For
the existence of the unseen public is the warrant that allows such
institutions to speak and act on behalf of unknowable audiences,
construed as the public. They seek to represent public opinion, public
service (broadcasting), the public interest, etc.
As Bonney and Wilson (1983: 77) have argued, the idea of a public
interest presupposes that there is ‘a single public with a unified set of

189