Page 264 - Information and American Democracy Technology in the Evolution of Political Power

P2: GCV/IRP
P1: IPH/IRP/IVO
August 14, 2002
0 521 80067 6
CY101-Bimber
19:12
CY101-06
Dahl’s Equality Proposition
formsofpublicidentityandopinionformationmaywellconfigurethem-
selves around new patterns of communication and new postbureaucratic
structures. Two of the most important foundations of a coherent, inte-
grated public sphere and the social order that goes with it have been in the
past geographic and institutional. Spatial proximity is the original basis
for political order, followed closely by the influence of institutions and
organizations on communication, ideas, and behavior. Throughout the
first, second, and third information regimes, these remained the foun-
dation of the public sphere. The fourth information revolution makes
both space and some traditional institutional structures less important
in the constitution of political order and the public sphere. The question
is, What kind of public sphere can exist on such altered foundations?
Dahlgrenisonehopefulobserverwhowonderswhetherthenovelways
of interacting through contemporary media are contributing to “new
ways of doing – and imagining – democracy.” 37 Bennett hypothesizes
that affinity groups and new political networks that span the boundaries
of nations and traditional organizations and communities through new
technology – what I have called postbureaucratic organizations – may be
“filling the spaces in civil society created by the decline in traditional civic
38
organizations.” Francis Fukuyama makes a similar argument, suggest-
ing that the coherence of public life follows a cyclical pattern of decay
and reconstitution rather than a trajectory of monotonic decline. 39 In
his view, the changing social order is attributable to the fall of Weberian
cultureandnormsnotjustinsideorganizationsbutacrosssociety:declin-
ing social structures rooted in centralized organizations, the crumbling
of highly institutionalized relationships, and the fading of hierarchically
organized social rules. 40
Themostimportantcountertrendtofragmentationandindividuation
of the public sphere involves media concentration. The concentration
of media ownership that emerged during the third information regime
is regrettable for many reasons, but it had the merit of contributing
toward common political communication and perceptions, at least in
comparison to the most extreme possibilities of decentralization and
fragmentation now visible. Concentration of ownership of mass media
clearly will persist in the emergent information regime. The fact that

37 Dahlgren, “The Internet and the Democratization of Civic Culture,” p. 339.
38 Bennett, “Introduction,” p. 310.
39
Francis Fukuyama, The Great Disruption: Human Nature and the Reconstitution of
Social Order (New York: Free Press, 1999).
40
Ibid.
247