Expanding the Public Sphere through Computer ... - ResearchGate

CHAPTER 2. THE PUBLIC SPHERE 35
orientation required information and discussion and topics which had been the
monopoly of the Church and of the State gradually came to be interpreted through
the institutions of the emerging public sphere. The fact that these institutions
existed indicated that the State and the Church has effectively lost control over
certain domains which previously were not subject to question, and suggest that
the public, as constituted through these institutions, was beginning to determine
the meaning of literature, art, economics and politics on its own through vigorous
discussion and criticism.
Similarly, MacKuen (1990, 84) emphasizes the importance of a diversity of political
views in order to produce public dialogue in which “individuals engage in
political discussions with others who hold different viewpoints.” Dahl (1989, 339)
too, notes that citizens must have access to information from a diverse group of
sources in order for a democratic vision to be realized. A part of the first aspect
of diversity is the range of views actually discussed in a public sphere. Opportunities
to discuss any topics are not synonymous with having a full range of topics
actually discussed. The idealized public sphere overcomes the “spiral of silence”
(Noelle-Neuman 1984) that develops when individuals do not feel their views are
acceptable in public discourse, and choose to keep silent rather than express them
in the face of obvious opposition.
Reciprocity refers to the opportunities to gain knowledge of the perspectives of
others, and the degree to which these opportunities are realized. Rucinski (1991,
189) identifies conditions of full and partial reciprocity:
Full, or symmetric, reciprocity occurs when all members of a collectivity
know and understand the breadth of perspectives and their underlying interests
existing in that social system. Partial reciprocity occurs in two primary
ways: when all perspectives and underlying interests regarding a social/political
issue are not known by all members of a collectivity; or when
the perspectives are known, but the interests are not.
The level of reciprocity within a system can be assessed by examining the
direction and degree of association between the range of perspectives and
the corresponding underlying interests within a collectivity and the extent
to which members jointly understand the viewpoints of others and the interests
underlying those perspectives. Operationally, then, reciprocity is the
ratio of perspectives and underlying interests known to the perspectives and
underlying interests available across members of a collectivity.