Expanding the Public Sphere through Computer ... - ResearchGate
Expanding the Public Sphere through Computer ... - ResearchGate Expanding the Public Sphere through Computer ... - ResearchGate
CHAPTER 5. MEASURING THE PUBLIC SPHERE 74 of constraints imposed on the participants. Diversity is assessed at two levels: the overall newsgroup, and within the newsgroup. Tractability measures the degree to which the volume or size of a public sphere zone changes on a day to day basis. High tractability would suggest that participants contract and expand the size of their public sphere according to their own needs and desires. Low tractability would suggest either low needs or desires to alter the size of the group, or external forces preventing the size from being altered. Tractability measures the capability of a medium to expand and contract depending on information flows. For example, the network news hole is 30 minutes, news or no news. But television networks have tractability by being able to do special live broadcasts, or to break in to other programming with really important news. On the other hand, network news is not contractable, so the volume of news has a defined floor. Newsgroups, of course, expand and contract regularly over time, without being out of the ordinary. Tractability is measured by the number of days featuring messages outside the normal bounds of activity. High tractability would suggest a high level of diversity. The second aspect of diversity measures the presence of multiple conversational patterns within threads of messages. These patterns are measured by the number of messages within a thread, the spread of days associated with the thread’s existence, the number of days on which messages were posted, and the number and type of authors posting messages. Diverse patterns would suggest that participants take advantage of their ability to shape the nature of their conversations; a lack of diversity would suggest either low desire, or external forces preventing participants from shaping their conversations. Reciprocity refers to the notion that people are engaged in conversation with each other, and that their messages are reflected upon and discussed by others. A message is considered reciprocal to a previous message if it appears in the same thread within seven days of the previous message, or if it cites the message directly by message identification number. Authors are considered to have a reciprocal relationship if their messages are reciprocated. The primary indicators of reciprocity are based on authors, and measured in terms of messages and other authors. In the idealized public sphere, reciprocity would be maximized: that is, each author would establish a reciprocal relationship with every other author. Reciprocity is operationalized as the proportion of authors with whom a reciprocal relationship is established, and the number of authors which the average message reciprocates. The final dimension concerns quality. Quality in the informal zone of the public
CHAPTER 5. MEASURING THE PUBLIC SPHERE 75 sphere requires that participants stay engaged with the topic at hand. This presents some difficulties in measurement, for it requires a subjective assessment or definition of what is “relevant” and what is “not relevant.” One of the functions of political talk, as discussed in Chapter 2, is to allow individuals to set their own agendas; that is, to decide for themselves what is relevant what should be talked about. By predetermining certain topics to represent high quality, and others to not represent high quality, removes some of the power of agenda setting from the participants. Nevertheless, it seems reasonable to suggest that within some broad boundaries, an informal zone of the public sphere, formed in this case to discuss abortion, that does not feature conversation about abortion, cannot be said to meet the demands of a quality discourse. The ideal state of the informal public sphere would have all participants talking always about abortion related matters. To the extent that the actual practice of the participants deviates from this state, the public sphere does not fulfill this particular dimension of the quality function. Quality is operationalized as the proportion of messages that are concerned with the abortion issue.
- Page 23 and 24: CHAPTER 2. THE PUBLIC SPHERE 23 own
- Page 25 and 26: CHAPTER 2. THE PUBLIC SPHERE 25 new
- Page 27 and 28: CHAPTER 2. THE PUBLIC SPHERE 27 com
- Page 29 and 30: CHAPTER 2. THE PUBLIC SPHERE 29 Hab
- Page 31 and 32: CHAPTER 2. THE PUBLIC SPHERE 31 pub
- Page 33 and 34: CHAPTER 2. THE PUBLIC SPHERE 33 the
- Page 35 and 36: CHAPTER 2. THE PUBLIC SPHERE 35 ori
- Page 37 and 38: CHAPTER 2. THE PUBLIC SPHERE 37 gen
- Page 39 and 40: CHAPTER 2. THE PUBLIC SPHERE 39 pub
- Page 41 and 42: CHAPTER 2. THE PUBLIC SPHERE 41 By
- Page 43 and 44: Chapter 3 Technology & the Public S
- Page 45 and 46: CHAPTER 3. TECHNOLOGY & THE PUBLIC
- Page 47 and 48: CHAPTER 3. TECHNOLOGY & THE PUBLIC
- Page 49 and 50: CHAPTER 3. TECHNOLOGY & THE PUBLIC
- Page 51 and 52: CHAPTER 3. TECHNOLOGY & THE PUBLIC
- Page 53 and 54: CHAPTER 3. TECHNOLOGY & THE PUBLIC
- Page 55 and 56: CHAPTER 3. TECHNOLOGY & THE PUBLIC
- Page 57 and 58: Chapter 4 Abortion Discourse in the
- Page 59 and 60: CHAPTER 4. ABORTION DISCOURSE IN TH
- Page 61 and 62: CHAPTER 4. ABORTION DISCOURSE IN TH
- Page 63 and 64: CHAPTER 4. ABORTION DISCOURSE IN TH
- Page 65 and 66: CHAPTER 4. ABORTION DISCOURSE IN TH
- Page 67 and 68: CHAPTER 4. ABORTION DISCOURSE IN TH
- Page 69 and 70: Chapter 5 Measuring the Public Sphe
- Page 71 and 72: CHAPTER 5. MEASURING THE PUBLIC SPH
- Page 73: CHAPTER 5. MEASURING THE PUBLIC SPH
- Page 77 and 78: CHAPTER 6. ANALYZING THE TALK.ABORT
- Page 79 and 80: CHAPTER 6. ANALYZING THE TALK.ABORT
- Page 81 and 82: CHAPTER 6. ANALYZING THE TALK.ABORT
- Page 83 and 84: CHAPTER 6. ANALYZING THE TALK.ABORT
- Page 85 and 86: CHAPTER 6. ANALYZING THE TALK.ABORT
- Page 87 and 88: CHAPTER 6. ANALYZING THE TALK.ABORT
- Page 89 and 90: CHAPTER 6. ANALYZING THE TALK.ABORT
- Page 91 and 92: CHAPTER 6. ANALYZING THE TALK.ABORT
- Page 93 and 94: CHAPTER 6. ANALYZING THE TALK.ABORT
- Page 95 and 96: CHAPTER 6. ANALYZING THE TALK.ABORT
- Page 97 and 98: CHAPTER 6. ANALYZING THE TALK.ABORT
- Page 99 and 100: CHAPTER 6. ANALYZING THE TALK.ABORT
- Page 101 and 102: Chapter 7 The Expanding Public Sphe
- Page 103 and 104: CHAPTER 7. THE EXPANDING PUBLIC SPH
- Page 105 and 106: CHAPTER 7. THE EXPANDING PUBLIC SPH
- Page 107 and 108: Appendix A The talk.abortion newsgr
- Page 109 and 110: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 111 and 112: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 113 and 114: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 115 and 116: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 117 and 118: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 119 and 120: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 121 and 122: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
- Page 123 and 124: APPENDIX A. TALK.ABORTION: AUGUST 9
CHAPTER 5. MEASURING THE PUBLIC SPHERE 74<br />
of constraints imposed on <strong>the</strong> participants. Diversity is assessed at two levels: <strong>the</strong><br />
overall newsgroup, and within <strong>the</strong> newsgroup.<br />
Tractability measures <strong>the</strong> degree to which <strong>the</strong> volume or size of a public sphere<br />
zone changes on a day to day basis. High tractability would suggest that participants<br />
contract and expand <strong>the</strong> size of <strong>the</strong>ir public sphere according to <strong>the</strong>ir<br />
own needs and desires. Low tractability would suggest ei<strong>the</strong>r low needs or desires<br />
to alter <strong>the</strong> size of <strong>the</strong> group, or external forces preventing <strong>the</strong> size from<br />
being altered. Tractability measures <strong>the</strong> capability of a medium to expand and<br />
contract depending on information flows. For example, <strong>the</strong> network news hole is<br />
30 minutes, news or no news. But television networks have tractability by being<br />
able to do special live broadcasts, or to break in to o<strong>the</strong>r programming with really<br />
important news. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, network news is not contractable, so <strong>the</strong><br />
volume of news has a defined floor. Newsgroups, of course, expand and contract<br />
regularly over time, without being out of <strong>the</strong> ordinary. Tractability is measured<br />
by <strong>the</strong> number of days featuring messages outside <strong>the</strong> normal bounds of activity.<br />
High tractability would suggest a high level of diversity. The second aspect of<br />
diversity measures <strong>the</strong> presence of multiple conversational patterns within threads<br />
of messages. These patterns are measured by <strong>the</strong> number of messages within a<br />
thread, <strong>the</strong> spread of days associated with <strong>the</strong> thread’s existence, <strong>the</strong> number of<br />
days on which messages were posted, and <strong>the</strong> number and type of authors posting<br />
messages. Diverse patterns would suggest that participants take advantage of<br />
<strong>the</strong>ir ability to shape <strong>the</strong> nature of <strong>the</strong>ir conversations; a lack of diversity would<br />
suggest ei<strong>the</strong>r low desire, or external forces preventing participants from shaping<br />
<strong>the</strong>ir conversations.<br />
Reciprocity refers to <strong>the</strong> notion that people are engaged in conversation with each<br />
o<strong>the</strong>r, and that <strong>the</strong>ir messages are reflected upon and discussed by o<strong>the</strong>rs. A message<br />
is considered reciprocal to a previous message if it appears in <strong>the</strong> same thread<br />
within seven days of <strong>the</strong> previous message, or if it cites <strong>the</strong> message directly by<br />
message identification number. Authors are considered to have a reciprocal relationship<br />
if <strong>the</strong>ir messages are reciprocated. The primary indicators of reciprocity<br />
are based on authors, and measured in terms of messages and o<strong>the</strong>r authors. In<br />
<strong>the</strong> idealized public sphere, reciprocity would be maximized: that is, each author<br />
would establish a reciprocal relationship with every o<strong>the</strong>r author. Reciprocity is<br />
operationalized as <strong>the</strong> proportion of authors with whom a reciprocal relationship<br />
is established, and <strong>the</strong> number of authors which <strong>the</strong> average message reciprocates.<br />
The final dimension concerns quality. Quality in <strong>the</strong> informal zone of <strong>the</strong> public