THE NEW STRUCTURAL CHANGE OF PUBLICITY AND THE PUBLIC SPHERE AND THEIR ROLE IN ORGANIZATIONS'...

THE NEW STRUCTURAL CHANGE OF PUBLICITY AND THE PUBLIC SPHERE AND THEIR ROLE IN ORGANIZATIONS’ COMMUNICATION MANAGEMENT SOCIAL MEDIA AND PUBLIC SPHERE 2.0

i

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

“Human nature is not a machine to be built after a model, and set to do

exactly the work prescribed for it, but a tree, which requires to grow and

develop itself on all sides, according to the tendency of the inward forces

which make it a living thing.”

“Such are the differences among human beings in their sources of

pleasure, their susceptibilities of pain, and the operation on them of dif-

ferent physical and moral agencies, that unless there is a corresponding

diversity in their modes of life, they neither obtain their fair share of hap-

piness, nor grow up to the mental, moral, and aesthetic stature of which

their nature is capable.” John S. Mill, On Liberty (1859

The bourgeois public sphere was developed during the 17th and 18th centuries. This

public sphere occupied the area between the public, with its enclosed institutions and

organizations, and the circle private life of the family. The term was established in 1962

by Jürgen Habermas when he developed the concept in his book entitled The Structur-

al Transformation of the Public Sphere. He realized that it is within the area between

the public and the private where public discourse takes place and public opinion, as the

function of public discourse is formed (McQuail, 2005:180-181; Habermas, 1989:1-3).

Since the 17th and 18th centuries, the public sphere has undergone various transfor-

mations and, even though it is largely argued that the utopian public sphere as concep-

tualized by Habermas does not yet exists, it is regarded as a necessary precondition

that all democracies should strive towards.

In the 20th and 21st centuries, new media, especially the internet, have been celebrat-

ed as a potential way to break away from the vertical information flow and to create

new arenas for public discourse. One form of new media is social networking sites

(SNSs). Amongst the SNSs available on the internet, Facebook has turned out as one

of the most influential media platforms nowadays. 800 million active users are one of

the key facts that justifies this statement, also the time users spend on this social net-

work generating a specific, but still restricted, media environment – a framed networked

society that is represented in its given point in time. Also politicians do not want to

miss the opportunity to be active in the world of social network and want to take a step

ii

in this field. A good example is the American president Barack Obama who realized the

potential of Facebook and incorporated it in his new media campaign during the presi-

dential election of 2008. Facebook enabled Obama to expand his voter reach and

communicate with even with the previously politically unengaged users. With stepping

into Facebook the SNS opened to door for him to create an arena where political in-

formation regarding the candidate, campaign and relevant political issues can be pro-

vided and discussed. A communication flow between Facebook members and the

president was created. In this study, the question is asked whether Facebook, as a

SNS, can be seen as an adequate forum where public discourse takes place and pub-

lic opinion, as the function of public discourse, is possible. Furthermore this study tries

to explore if Facebook, as SNS, can be seen as a public sphere and if there is a recog-

nizable change in the public sphere as a response of SNS.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I

FIGURES 4

1 THE STRUCTURAL CHANGE AND DYNAMICS OF THE NEW PUBLIC SPHERE CREAT-

ED IN AND BY THE INTERNET AND SOCIAL MEDIA 5

2 THE EFFECTS OF THESE NEW FORMS OF PUBLIC COMMUNICATION FOR THE

COMMUNICATION MANAGEMENT (PR) OF ORGANIZATIONS BY REFERRING TO AT

LEAST THREE MESO OR MACRO MODELS OF COMMUNICATION SCIENCE 7

2.1 THE ARENA MODEL AS THE STARTING POINT 7 2.2 AGENDA SETTING IN THE DIGITAL AGE 8 2.3 THIRD-PERSON EFFECT 10

3 THE NEW ROLES OF STAKEHOLDER INTEGRATION AND CORPORATE SOCIAL RE-

SPONSIBILITY (CSR) – ACCORDING TO THE RECENT LITERATURE 13

4 AN APPROACH TO PLAN, MONITOR AND CONTROL AN ORGANIZATION’S ISSUE

AND CAMPAIGN MANAGEMENT IN THE NEW PUBLIC SPHERE 16

5 CONCLUSION 19

6 REFERENCES 21

TABLE OF CONTENT

Figures

4

FIGURES

FIGURE 1 THE THREE LEVEL OF PUBLIC SPHERE IN THE ARENA MODEL ....................................... 7 FIGURE 2 SCREEN SHOT OF THE ZDNET.COM PAGE, DISPLAYING THE VARIOUS BUTTONS LINKED TO

THE SOCIAL NETWORK PAGES ................................................................................. 10 FIGURE 3 DIAGRAM SOCIAL MEDIA MARKETING CAMPAIGN .................................................... 17

The structural change and dynamics of the new public sphere created in and by the Internet and social

media

5

1 THE STRUCTURAL CHANGE AND DYNAMICS OF THE NEW PUBLIC SPHERE CRE-

ATED IN AND BY THE INTERNET AND SOCIAL MEDIA

Changes of the media and its publics are in the focus of Jürgen Habermas famous

book Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit in which he described the transformation of the

public sphere. He analyzed the transformation processes that took place between the

17th and 19th century. His book had relatively little impact on the American debate until

the publication was translated into English in 1989. Published before the digital revo-

lution, the work addressed the implications of modern communications technologies

only in a fragmentary fashion.

The public sphere, in its most direct form, can be described as a sphere or environ-

ment that enables communicative acts between citizens. Habermas makes a differen-

tiation between two spheres:

The cultural public sphere, also known as the words of letters

The political public sphere

An ideal situation would be if everyone, regardless the societal status, can participate

the act of the communication (1989, 36-37). The participation of the public to this ide-

al situation plays an important role in Habermas’ original manifestation were he de-

scribes the British coffee house, the French salons and the German table societies as

the places where the cultural, social and political discussions took place.

Linking the phenomenon Facebook to Habermas’ thoughts the public of Facebook

has to be included as these are “conditions of communication under which [they] can

come into being a discursive formation of opinion and will” (Habermas 1992, 446).

Which means that the communicative public is generating the discursive formation.

According to an interview from Tobias Olsson with Slavko Splichal Professor of

Communication and Public Opinion at the University of Ljubljana's Faculty of Social

Sciences and Fellow of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts is denying the

idea that “the Internet actually could generate a special, new type of an online public

sphere […][as] the media have not revolutionized the public” (Olsson 2010, 67).

The structural change and dynamics of the new public sphere created in and by the Internet and social

media

6

There is an interrelation between the public and the public sphere. The public can be

seen as an environment and the public sphere can be seen as an act in this environ-

ment. Which leads us again to Splichal who stated that the public sphere cannot act

and communicate. And still Facebook can be considered as a public sphere cause

the user itself generates the content of communication that takes place on Facebook.

Habermas’ work on the public sphere was often criticized by post–modernists who

question the power of discursive argumentation and the illusion of its homogeneity, its

absence of passion and the irrational and its homogeneous view on the mass media

(Calhoun, 1992). But also its often forgotten that Habermas’ more recent adaptions

from the late 1990ies give a more versatile view on a “highly complex network that

branches out into a multitude of overlapping international, national, regional, local and

subcultural arenas” (Habermas 1996, 373). Now the public sphere can be differenti-

ate into levels, which are depending on organizational complexity and range as well

as into the level depending on destiny. The public sphere is not a marketplace, nor is

it a coffeehouse, a salon, an organization or a newspaper. Rather, the public sphere

is above these physical appearances and can be seen as an abstract forum for dia-

logue and ideology as a lively debate on multiple levels within society. New communi-

cation technologies, which are nowadays affordable for almost everyone, shifted the

public sphere from an institutional sphere to a new communication sphere. Social

media became a medium for discussion, dialog and decisions, a tool that is able to

mobilize and organize.

Considering Facebook from a communicative-structural way there is no doubt that

Facebook can be seen as a media environment that has enough power to colonize

the user with the goal to become even more powerful, but it’s still open if there is also

something in for the user.

When Habermas’ theory that the public sphere doesn’t act, but the public does, is

transferred to the SNS, it’s not Facebook that acts but the networked public.

The effects of these new forms of public communication for the communication management (PR) of

organizations by referring to at least three meso or macro models of communication science

7

PUBLIC SPHERE OF TRADITIONAL MASS MEDIA

PUBLIC SPHERE OF THE ASSEMBLY

ENCOUNTER PUBLIC SPHERE

2 THE EFFECTS OF THESE NEW FORMS OF PUBLIC COMMUNICATION FOR THE

COMMUNICATION MANAGEMENT (PR) OF ORGANIZATIONS BY REFERRING TO AT

LEAST THREE MESO OR MACRO MODELS OF COMMUNICATION SCIENCE

2.1 THE ARENA MODEL AS THE STARTING POINT

In 1991 the German sociologists Gerhards and Neidhardt have developed the arena

model of the public sphere. They analyzed the drawings on Habermas’ discourse-

model and on Luhmann’s mirror-model combined both theories, the action and the

system theory, and with that they attempt to fill the gap between normative and de-

scriptive perspectives of the public spheres. There are three different levels – or are-

nas – of the public sphere. Depending on the number of participants and the degree

of differentiation of communication Gerhards and Neidhardt differentiate between the

encounter public sphere, the public sphere of assemblies and the media public

sphere.

Figure 1 The three level of public sphere in the arena model



8

For modern society the level of the public sphere of traditional mass media is seen to

be the most influential one. On this level there are less options to act are less natural

even if the public is the largest one. Simultaneously the mass communication leads to

a professionalization of the functional roles. Like in a soccer arena there are three

basic communication roles: the speaker, the soccer player acting on the field – also

called the professional intermediaries – and the audience sitting on the gallery seats

and watching or not watching the game, listening or not listening to the speaker and

buying or not buying some food and/or drinks. The audience can turn the receiver on

and off (Gerhards & Neidhardt 1991, p. 65).

With this analytic differentiation of the different levels and roles a framework is offered

for the theoretical and empirical examinations of all phenomena of the public sphere.

But the model has to be redone as the level and the diverse role of online communi-

cation is missing. To redo the arena model the social network analysis has to be dis-

cussed and merged with the arena model.

2.2 AGENDA SETTING IN THE DIGITAL AGE

Agenda Setting as defined in Mass Media, Mass Culture is the process whereby the

mass media determine what we think and worry about. The theory explains why peo-

ple with similar media exposure place an importance on the same issues. Although

different people may feel differently about the issue at hand, most people feel the

same issues are important.

Sharing is one of the most important elements in the social web. Social Network

Sites like Facebook, Twitter, Flickr, Blogs like WordPress or Blogspot or any kind

other of website that allows its users to add, delete or modify its content (e.g. Wikipe-

dia) are designed with one purpose: to let the user share their content. This leads to

the fact that the web is more social than ever before. Many websites of newspapers,

magazines, radio stations, tv broadcaster or other types of the traditional media in-

creasing the links to share their news by placing buttons which say i.a. “blog this”, a

button added to the browser’s tollbar, which llows the user to post directly to the us-

ers’ blog from any webpage, or the well-known “like” from facebook (see images be-

low) to post directly to social media networks, social filters and other websites where

user-generated content is used as a important information.



9

It must be underlined that distribution of this selected user-generated social news

gets more and more important. Beyond this is a very important and smart strategy:

moving the content to places where people are talking about – the social media.

User-generated content is not just cyber-journalism in general way it is that people

are talking or discussing thing they are interested in and finally posting all that con-

tent to social media to improve their hobbies, interests or work.

According to Daniel Czitrons statement “the morst important news are which people

is looking for” (Czitron 1982, 14) and connecting this statement to the idea of a grow-

ing reality in the we it makes the impression that the paradigm have changed from

traditional paradigm (one-direction) to new paradigm with a two-direction flow: Videos

from, e.g. YouTube, news from, e.g. Spiegel Online and other pieces of citizen jour-

nalism are more present in the traditional agenda that ever. Non-professional users,

the citizen journalist, are placing this new citizen agenda to the social media and

therefor the two-direction flow is constantly redesigning the configuration of other

areas.

There are various ways to share and promote content to the social we. In an interna-

tional context there are medias like Zdnet.com. Zdnet.com placed different buttons,

connected to social network sites, to promote any blogger, facebook, google+ or twit-

ter user, as well as linkedin members to publish their content in their blogs or respec-

tive social network site. This fact can be set as a precedent that the trend leads to-

wards a new digital generation that spread journalistic content among the social me-

dia world.

As soon as media companies decide to distribute their journalistic content to social

media platforms and let the audience be part of the content production by asking

them in what they are interested in, the audience becomes part of the configuration

of the Agenda Setting.



10

Figure 2 Screen shot of the Zdnet.com page, displaying the various buttons linked to the social

network pages

2.3 THIRD-PERSON EFFECT

The Third-Person Effect is a hypothesis propose that individuals mostly tend to ex-

pect that the mass media have a greater influence on others than on themselves. In

other words the individuals anticipate that the mass media will have the lowest impact

on the respective individual – the first person – an average impact on the second per-

son (e.g. a good friend or close family members) and the highest impact on the third

person (e.g. distant relatives or friends, not well-known neighbors) (Bürker, 2012).

The Third-Person Effect, which was found by sociologist W. P. Davidson in 1983,

hypothesis that individuals perceive media to have different effects on themselves

than on others like the perceptual component and that this discrepancy can lead to

different outcomes, e.g. the behavioral, behavioral changes of the individual or other

communicative acts (Gunter & Storey 2003).

The Third-Person Effect has been effected a wide range in the media context. It can

be recognized in a variety of media messages such as violent television (Lometti et

al., 1994), pornography (Rojas et al., 1996), music, e.g. rap lyrics (McLeod et al.,



11

1997 ) as well as in political messages (Cohen & Davis, 1991), advertising (DeLorme

et al., ,2006), marketing (Grier & Brumbaugh, 2007) and new media (Banning &

Sweester, 2007). Therefor there is a reasonable question that there is support for the

TPE hypothesis in variety types of media.

When the potential impact of media is evaluated, people estimate themselves often

as more resistant to the influence of the media (Park & Salmon, 2005). Social network

sites provide an environment from which social comparison benefits. The experience

the individual makes by visiting a platform enhances their self-identity as the individu-

al can compare his or her experience downward with other peers on a social network

site (SNS). With connecting with others about similar issues it may reduce the per-

son’s problem (e.g. not finding a matching partner, adiposity…) and enhance to confi-

dence of the individual in continuing to solve the issue. Given the inherent tendency

of the downward comparison it seems to be plausible that the users of a social net-

work site will consider themselves smarter than other people.

Not to be ignored should be the fact that the third-person effect arouses ego-

involvement. In 1989 Richard Perlof explored the interface between ego-involvement

and the third-person effect. He proposed that people with a higher ego-involvement

tend not to be influenced by a message, no matter ho strong the message tries to

convince the individual. Jean Twenge explored in her studies that “we are a much

more informal and accepting society than we once were” (Twenge, J., 18). According

to her studies the young generation of user-generated media is defined by a high

concern for community and diversity but also as narcissistic and ego-involved in gen-

eral. Furthermore she founds that blogs and high frequently blogging has an impact

on the ego-involvement of the person who blogs. In other words the more an individ-

ual blogs the more ego-involved the individual becomes and the more he or she per-

ceives his or her blog to be more important than other blogs (Gale, 2007). The ego-

involvement often plays an important role as it can be seen as in indicator how

(un)consciously user-generated discussions or statements are (Gale, 2007). Without

believing that the TPE exists in SNS this statement would not be possible. Further-

more it is proven that people have a stronger TPE when they believe that they can

influence certain issues (Salwen & Driscoll, 1997).

The personal opinion about a subjects and matters of every single user is different

from other opinions and is often strongly subjective. Glance at www.gossiprocks.com

briefly one user might say that Heidi Klum got one of the most obvious nose surgeries



12

another one might deny that. The third-person effect seems to be a highly occurring

phenomenon crossing various media contexts.

The popularity of Facebook has generated numerous discussions on the individual-

level effects of social networking. However, we know very little about people's percep-

tions of the effects of the most popular social networking site, Facebook. Based on

the current researches and empirical findings mentioned above as well as on the fact

that social network sites are offering a more conductive setting for social comparison,

where the young generation, which is ego-involved, and (subjective) user-generated

content, the third-person effect has a stronger impact on social networks site and its

users than the traditional media.

The new roles of stakeholder integration and corporate social responsibility (CSR) – according to the

recent literature

13

3 THE NEW ROLES OF STAKEHOLDER INTEGRATION AND CORPORATE SOCIAL

RESPONSIBILITY (CSR) – ACCORDING TO THE RECENT LITERATURE

Social media allows us to communicate in a faster, more efficient and less time-

consuming way. Engagement in the public sphere has never been easier and that's

the real actual value of social media, not their stock prices.

The news concerning social network, in detail Facebook, often only captures head-

lines but misses the real importance of social media in our lives. Whether its IPO val-

ues the company at nearly $100 billion is immaterial in the long run. Stock prices rise

and fall, but the impact of social networks on society goes beyond share value.

Just a few years ago human beings interacted with each other in face-to-face, ex-

changed ideas and maintained and nurtured friendships. Coffee houses, pubs, salons,

neighborhood libraries and bookstores were seem as a created community. They

brought people together, not always to agree but at least to face each other in the

public. When newspapers entered into this public sphere they became an essential

part of the modern democratic process. In this growing sphere the "watchdog" func-

tion of the press became a significant part of democracy. In the Western world, these

community centers were the fundament of what we call "civil society." The civil society

gave expression to our democratic beliefs and created a zone for discussions be-

tween government and the public.

Newspapers offering more than just information, they enable human communication

exchange. Facebook and other social media like Twitter are taking the human com-

munication exchange idea to a higher level. They not just creating their own private

social domains, a kind of parallel universe of sharing and liking – a kind of second life

– actually they also become their own nations. At more than 800 million users, Face-

book is one of the largest parallel nations worldwide, including private information

about its users, just like the government does. Collecting private information is not the

definition of democracy, but still it functions like one and it let people to think in a

democratic way. The user can like and dislike, can friend and defriend how they de-

cide for themself.

Facebook must become a trusted social network site as trust is key and without trust,

such places waste away and die. As soon as a social network site like Facebook has


recent literature

14

trust in place it can become unstoppable. Facebook can encourage social interactions,

create new ideas, innovations and more. This is where social media become a power-

ful social force in the modern public sphere. Because we live in a world of constant

fear and stress about our own lives, our careers, the planet and the fate our families

and friends has to take, trusted sites like Facebook and other social network sites are

places we turn to relieve this tension and allow us to live and express our humanity.

The dialogue with stakeholders, in case of social media stakeholders are the user of

the social network site, has been studied most largely from the stakeholder theory

approach which was originally detailed by R. Edward Freeman. The stakeholder theo-

ry describes groups that are stakeholders of an organization or corporation. Further-

more the theory gives examples how to rise the interest of those groups: The Princi-

ple of Who or What Really Counts (Freeman 1984). But as Hart and Sharma pointed

out in 2004 the current studies do not consider “the potential for engaging stakehold-

ers to understand “future change” or to resolve the radical uncertainty of constantly

evolving knowledge.” In other words: stakeholder engagement should be treated as

an organizational capability bounded to the resource based point of view of the organ-

ization.

Social media has tremendously changed the way of companies to communicate.

Marketing, PR and advertising but as soon as it comes to communicating corporate

social responsibility and other sustainability issues the majority of the companies do

not know how to bring these topics together with social media.

One great example of stakeholder integration in context of

corporate social responsibility is the social media cam-

paign of Häagen Dazs Honey Bees Campaign. Häagen

Dazs has created a website devoted to promoting

knowledge of honey bees and their importance to not only

the Häagen Dazs Company, but also to the general public.

Stating things such as, “We rely on honey bees for one-

third of our food supply, so when honey bees are in danger, we’re all in danger.” The

site is visually pleasing and interactive, with informative sections including “The Hon-

ey Bee Crisis,” which educates readers on CCD and the value of the bee. Häagen

Dazs has a vital incentive to educate the public about value of honey bees. Some of


recent literature

15

their most popular flavors rely on honey bees to pollinate the ingredients that make

the brand so popular with consumers. The ice cream company is donating money to

fund honey bee research. Penn State and UC Davis are two of the organizations that

are benefiting from the donations and working towards increased bee knowledge,

help, and awareness. In addition, partnering with UC Davis, Häagen Dazs has set up

a one-half acre of bee friendly gardens that serves as a model for the public of what a

bee friendly habitat should look like calling it the Häagen-Dazs Honey Bee Haven

Demonstration Garden and Campus Buzzway. With funding from Häagen Dazs, UC

Davis was able to start their Gardener Certification program which educates the pub-

lic on how to set up and sustain a bee friend garden that aims to aid in the diversity of

forage and natural habitat for honey bees.

“In 2008, the Häagen-Dazs brand partnered with Penn State, donating

$150,000 to further the University’s outstanding research in this

field. In 2009, the $125,000 gift from the Häagen-Dazs brand provid-

ed immediate funds for research, education and outreach, and student

training, synergizing the collective activities in sustainable pollination at

Penn State.

This year, the Häagen-Dazs brand is donating an additional $50,000

for continued community outreach and sponsorship of Penn State’s

Center for Pollinator Research’s first International Conference on Polli-

nator Biology, Health and Policy, bringing the Häagen-Dazs brand’s to-

tal honey bee research donation to $620,000 over the last three years.”

(http://www.helpthehoneybees.com/#helpingpartners, accessed

07.07.2012)

an approach to plan, monitor and control an organization’s issue and campaign management in the

new public sphere

16

4 AN APPROACH TO PLAN, MONITOR AND CONTROL AN ORGANIZATION’S ISSUE

AND CAMPAIGN MANAGEMENT IN THE NEW PUBLIC SPHERE

“If you have questions, go to the store. Your customes

have the answers.”

- Sam Walton (founder Walmart) -

Social technologies made it possible to connect people and made them sharing their

information but still the new technologies are reducing the opportunities for market-

place exploration. The social web brings everything together: the good, the bad and

the ugly. A social media manager can plan a campaign that works and simultaneously

putting down what doesn’t fit to the needs and interest of the target group or the goal.

To plan a campaign for a organization’s issue the achieved goal has to be defined

precisely. But it’s no possible to define a goal without being aware of the root causes

of the issue. That’s why it’s recommendable to first go back to some fundamental

questions before coming up with an overall strategy:

What is the organization trying to achieve?

Why is the organization trying to do this?

Whom is the organization trying to reach? (target group)

Where can the target group be effectively reached?

What is the organization trying to get them to do?

As a social media campaign should always be connected to the marketing objectives

this is somehow another important point to think about. Furthermore it is necessary to

clearly define the social media assets.


new public sphere

17

Figure 3 Diagram Social Media Marketing Campaign

(http://laurelpapworth.com/australia-social-media-marketing/, access 07.07.2012)

Social media monitoring can on be effective if the goals are well defined. The monitor-

ing can have different purpose, e.g. market research, improving the customer service

or rising brand-awareness. Nowadays social media monitoring describes the observa-

tion of the online sphere.

There are different types of social media monitoring tools which all providing the

brand with data of their recent campaign. There are many tools out on the market-

place that are helping the clients to make decisions by providing them with insights,

foresights and strategic direction.

Social media monitoring can clarify not only the following questions by offering differ-

ent reports:

Brand Assessment Report

What are the people saying about the brand?

Competitive Audit Report

Who are the influencers and how can you reach them?

Marketing Measurement Report


new public sphere

18

How does your brand compare to the competition?

Market Research Report

What can you learn about a certain topic?

Product/Programm Performance Report

How did your campaign or product launch perform in social media?

But all these reports won’t help if the wrong keywords are set or if the goal and the

strategy isn’t controlled well.

Conclusion

19

5 CONCLUSION

"Reframing the discussion for a moment, one could say that

journalism has been doing its best to deny the mounting evidence

of difficulties in the classic Enlightenment formulations — a refusal

to air the relevance of such disputes for its own activities." - Peter Dahlgren-

In Habermas’ critical analysis Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit published in 1992is he

is describing the evolution from opinion to public opinion and the socio–structural

transformation. Habermas explains that the emergence of the mass press is based on

the commercialization of the participation of the masses in the public sphere. This

sphere was a space where individuals were free from the state/economy and dis-

cussed issues of shared importance. People would meet in coffee houses, town halls

and various places to discuss politics and trade news. These face-to-face forums act-

ed as community meeting points where individuals could engage in civic activity (such

as; politics, the economy, the workplace, etc.). For Habermas the public sphere was a

venue where people shared their opinions and were able to change or influence deci-

sions separate from the state and economy. The 18th century public sphere’s allowed

a public participatory democracy in which everybody could have their voices heard

and improve society.

The communication system of the industrial society was based on mass media, spe-

cifically on large televisions, radios and the print press. These technologies logically

allowed mass dissemination of a one-way message from one-to-many. The wide-

spread of the Internet, mobile communication, digital media and a variety of social

network tools throughout the world has transformed the communication system into

interactive horizontal networks. New forms of social media, such blogs, social net-

working sites, podcasts and more, are providing the flow of messages from many-to-

many.

The investigation of electronic mass media in the public sphere made things even

worse. Now, at the same time they have an higher impact than the print media ever

had, their format prevents interaction very effectively and deprives the public of the

opportunity to say something and to disagree. All this leads Habermas to the conclu-

Conclusion

20

sion that "The world fashioned by the mass media is a public sphere in appearance

only" (Habermas 1989).

References

21

6 REFERENCES

Czitron, D. J. (1982). Media and the American Mind: From Morse to McLuhan. Chapell Hill.

University of North Carolina Press.

Cohen, J., Davis, R. G. (1991). Third-person effects and the differential impact in negative

political advertising. Journalism Quarterly, 68(4), 680-88.

DeLorme, D.E., Huh, J., Reid, L.N. (2007). Others are influenced, but not me: Older’s adults’

perception of DTC prescription drug advertising effects. Journal of Aging Studies, 21 (2), 135-

151.

Freemann, R.E. (1984). Strategic Management: A stakeholder approach. Boston: Pitman

Gale Reference Team (2007). Narccistic, but in a good way. The Advocat, 938, 6.

Gerhards, J., Neidhardt, F. (1991). Strukturen und Funktionen moderner Öffentlichkeit.

Fragestellungen und Ansätze [Structures and Functions of the Modern Public Sphere], 31-90.

In: Öffentlichkeit, Kultur, Massenkommunikation, edited by Stefan Müller-Doohm & Klaus

Neumann-Braun. Oldenburg: Universitätsverlag.

Grier, S.A., Brumbaugh, A.M. (2007). Compared to whom? The impact of status on third per-

son effects in advertising persuasion in South Africa context. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 6,

5-18.

Gunther, A. C., Storey, J. D. (2003). The influence of presumed influence. Journal of Com-

munication, 53 (2),199-125.

Habermas, J. (1962). Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit. Neuwied und Berlin: Luchtehand.

Habermas, J. (1989). The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere

Habermas, J. (1992). Further Reflections on the Public Sphere

Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and

democracy. Cambridge: Polity Press.

References

22

Hart, S. L., Sharma, S. ( 2004), Engaging fringe stakeholders for competitive imagination.

Academy of Management Executive Vol 18, No 1, pages 7-18

Lometti, G. E., Ashby, L. L., & Welch, W. (1994). The nature of the public’s objections to tele-

vision pro- grams: An examination of third-person effects. Paper presented at the annual

meeting of the Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, Atlanta, GA

Rojas, H., Shah, D. V., & Faber, R. J. (1996). For the good of others: Censorship and the

third-person effect. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8(2), 163-186.

McLeod, D. M., Eveland, W. P., & Nathanson, A.I. (1997). Support for censorship of violent

and misogynic rap lyrics: An analysis of the third-person effect. Communication Research,

24(2), 153-174.

Park, H.S., Salmon, C.T. (2005). A test of third-person effect in public relations: Application of

social comparison theory. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 82 (2), 25-43.

Perlof, R.M. (1989). Ego-Involvement and the Third Person Effect of Televised News Cover-

age. Communication Research, 18, 236-262.

Salwen, M.B, Driscoll, P.D. (1997). Consequences of third-person effect in support of press

restrictions in the O.J. Simpsons trial. Journal of Communication, 47, 60-77.

Shah, D. V., Faber, R. J., & Youn, S. (1999). Susceptibility and severity: Perceptual dimen-

sions underlying the third-person effect. Communication Research, 26(2), 240-267.

Sweetser, K.D. (2007). How much do they think it affects them and whom they belive?: Com-

paring the Third-Person Effect and credibility of blogs and traditional media. Communication

Quarterly, 55(4), 451-466.

Twenge, J.M. (2007). Generation Me: Why Today's Young Americans Are More Confident,

Assertive, Entitled--and More Miserable Than Ever Before. Free Press, New York.

Wilson,James R., and Roy S.Wilson. Mass Media, Mass Culture. Fifth Edition.Boston.Mc

Graw Hill, 2001.

THE NEW STRUCTURAL CHANGE OF PUBLICITY AND THE PUBLIC SPHERE AND THEIR ROLE IN ORGANIZATIONS'...

Documents

Transcript of THE NEW STRUCTURAL CHANGE OF PUBLICITY AND THE PUBLIC SPHERE AND THEIR ROLE IN ORGANIZATIONS'...