Post #3

Blog Post #3

In this blog post, I will elaborate on the role of social media and alternative media outlets in forming an independent “public sphere” that Habermas idealizes. Habermas’s public sphere hinges upon 3 main qualities: inclusivity, independence, and rationality. According to Habermas, the public sphere should include representation from diverse demographics, exist separately from the government and economic entities, and facilitate rational discussion. However, Habermas argues that the public sphere has disintegrated because of the expansion of the capitalist economy. The mass media, once a platform of political information, became corrupted into a platform for specific political agendas and corporate advertisement. Mainstream media outlets such as MSNBC are owned by large corporations such as Comcast. On top of that, mainstream news outlets have become heavily politicized echo chambers rather than objective messengers.

Many argue that the Internet has become the new public sphere in the 21st Century. The Internet is not a perfectly impartial medium, but I believe that it offers enough freedom to harbor the discourse essential for a modern public sphere. The Internet is especially pertinent for the discussion of American militarism because of the mainstream media’s reluctance to criticize America’s military pursuits. Mass media not only says what happens but, directly and indirectly, says what you should think about what happens. Every media outlet does this to a certain degree. Alternative media outlets on Youtube such as the The Young Turks, Jimmy Dore Show, and Secular Talk also report with a biased perspective but one that is contrarian to the mass media’s perspective. The mantle of discourse is instead hosted by forums, comment sections, and the discussion sections of websites like Reddit.

Another important way the mass media diverges from the public sphere is through selection of coverage. Simply put, mainstream media outlets do not cover topics proportionally to the public’s interest in them. A study done by an editor on Richochet using data from Bloomberg and Media Research Center revealed that the mainstream media does not base their coverage on the concerns of the public. For example, 35% of respondents cited health care as their most pressing concern but only 4% of mainstream media coverage is related to health care. Foreign policy with Russia was cited as the most pressing concern by only 6% of respondents but consists of 75% of mainstream media coverage. Online activity, whether through social media or creative platforms, gives the public the ability to engage in discourse on issues of its choosing. Granted, the online public sphere does not have an overarching consensus on any issue, but a relative consensus that is often at odds with the mass media. For example, polls show that around 60% of Americans support single-payer healthcare but a single-payer proposition is infrequently touched upon in the mainstream media’s healthcare coverage.

Sources: http://fair.org/home/media-find-room-for-trumpcare-too-progressive-but-not-for-single-payer/

https://ricochet.com/442941/americans-care-vs-media-cares/