Expanding the Public Sphere through Computer ... - ResearchGate

CHAPTER 3. TECHNOLOGY & THE PUBLIC SPHERE 49
it goes: individuals can enter or leave the “discussion” at any time, responding
to both recent and not-so-recent messages, starting new threads in the discussion.
In this example, the size of the discussion would be limited by the physical dimensions
of the bulletin board and the participants would be limited to those who
physically happened by the board. The computerized version is very similar, with
the “physical” location of the board replaced by one or many physical locations
in a network of computers who are connected to each other, and the “physical”
location of the participants replaced by their presence on a computer that can access
the board. The size of the discussion is limited by the much-less constraining
limitations of the network, and the participants are limited to the much-less constraining
limitations of the number of network users.
Although the use of computers for discussion is a relatively recent phenomenon,
scholars have begun systematic investigations of its characteristics. Some have
examined the relationship between access to information and the distribution of
power in society, suggesting that computer- mediated discussion could ease differential
access, distribute power more broadly and thus lead to greater democratization
(Stallabrass 1995, Jacobson 1993, Stallabrass 1995). Others, mostly concerned
with educational applications, have noted the potential to foster creativity
and cooperation among participants while recognizing the limitations of electronic
space (Perrone, Repenning, Spencer & Ambach 1996, Acker 1995, McCormick &
McCormick 1992, Kiesler, Seigel & McGuire 1984). The absence of social cues to
status and gender have raised issues concerning the possibilities of creating more
democratic communication (Savicki, Lingenfelter & Kelley 1996, Herring 1993).
The relationship between engaging in computer mediated discussion and other
forms of participation have been examined by (Fisher, Margolis & Resnick 1994).
Linguistic models of communication provide a framework for distinguishing various
forms of computer mediated discussion. The fundamental model of linguistic
communication, what Shank (1993) described as the “paragon of language-inuse”
is the conversation (Fiske 1982, Saussure 1959, Schegloff 1972). A conversation
is characterizable by its organization and activities (Levinson 1983, Murray
1991). Three general types of conversations have been identified: the monologue,
the dialogue and the discussion (Shank 1993, Levinson 1983, Winograd
& Flores 1986). A monologue involves one message sender and multiple, passive
receivers. A dialogue involves two participants taking turns and exchanging roles
as sender and receiver. A discussion involves a single person who starts as the
sender and retains control of the conversation, with multiple receivers, some of
whom rotate (with the initiator) the role of the sender. While computer mediated