The article cited below, which I found before completing the
week 1 readings, became all the more interesting when framed with the question
“what do we mean by public?” This article identifies several publics including
legislators, institutional administrators, students and watchdog groups. I find
myself asking whether these parties are grouped based on status, such as
Habermas’ Bourgeois public, or if they are grouped based on shared ideologies,
which seems to be Hauser’s argument. A group based on shared social standing would
be largely static, while Hauser’s model would allow more fluidity.
Habermas’ model is easy to criticize for its simplicity on
two levels. First, his discussion of the public sphere only mentions one
public, the Bourgeois public. This criticism is discussed in more detail by
both Hauser and Fraser. The second criticism is that (at least in contemporary
society) there are publics who do not have a shared social standing. With
computing technology becoming ever more accessible, we can have publics who
have never met, or who have little material homogeneity. This would suggest
that Hauser’s model is more applicable.
Hauser advocates a view of public that builds upon the work
of Habermas, but that deviates by his addition of many fluid publics. This
model seems, on the surface, to have it all, but when you try to apply this
theory to actual publics, the waters muddy. If Hauser is right, and publics
form based on shared values, how does discourse occur within the group? If the
definition of a public is like-mindedness, then wouldn’t debate within the
public cause members to leave, rather than encourage discourse?
Answering the question “what do we mean by public?” will be
instrumental in understanding why these issues are considered the most
important for 2013. It will also affect how messages to these groups should be
interpreted.
"Top 10 Higher Education State Policy Issues for
2013." American Association of State Colleges and Universities, n.d. Web.
7 Jun 2013.
<http://www.aascu.org/policy/publications/policy-matters/topten2013.pdf>.
No comments:
Post a Comment