Conception of The Public Sphere (The Baltic Countries)

Jurga Jasinevičiūtė

Ilona Jurkonytė

The goal: to overlook theoretical approaches towards the phenomena of public sphere and analyze its transformation using data of Baltic countries during the national awakening period (1987 – 1990).

The public sphere we can define following Habermas, Garnhem and Jakubowitcz

It is “as the network of media, educational, knowledge and opinion-forming institutions within civil society whose operation is conducive to the emergence of public opinion as a political power” (Jakubowitcz, 1997, p. 155)

Curran distinguishes three approaches to the public

sphere: • According to classical liberal theory, the public sphere is

the space between government and society in which private individuals exercise formal and informal control over the state (the media concidered to be “the fourth estate of realm” , “watchdog”).

• Radical democratic theory conceives the media as a

battleground between contending forces.

• Traditional Marxist/communist perspective maintains the opinion that the media should be viewed as ideological apparatus of the state, working for propaganda.

Nicholas Garnham considering Habermas’s theory counts at least three virtues of Habermas’s approach towards public sphere.

• Firstly, Habermas’s original approach focuses upon the link between the institutions and practices of mass public communication and the institutions and practices of democratic politics.

• Habermas’s approach focuses on the necessary material resource base for any public sphere.

• Third, Habermas distinguishes the public sphere from both state and market.

Habermas’s concept of public sphere offers a basis for the critical analysis of current developments of both media and

democratic politics.

Garnham claims that usual structures of public communication are changing. This change is characterized by:

• (1) a reinforcement of the market and the progressive destruction of public service as the preferred mode for the allocation of cultural resources;

• (2) by a focus on a TV set as the locus for a privatized, domestic mode of consumption;

• (3) by the creation of market divided between the information-rich and information-poor;

• (4) by a shift from largely national to largely international markets in the informational and cultural spheres.

Without freedom of assembly and freedom to impact and

receive information it would be impossible for citizens: • 1 - to possess the knowledge of the views of other necessary to

reach agreements between themselves;

• 2 - to possess knowledge of the actions of those to whom executive responsibilities are delegated so as to make them accountable;

• 3 - to poses knowledge of the external environment necessary to arrive at appropriate judgment of both personal and societal interests.

The main characteristic of nowadays communication – its

mediated nature. Mediated character of communication, according to Garnham, brings such issues:

• Not everyone has got equal access to both channel and means of communication. Cannel and means of communication are possible to control.

• Second, what also became mediated is the content of communication and the subject of debate, or to use Habermas’s terminology, the experience of the lifeworld.

• The establishment of representative forms in political scope rendered the rationalization and alienation elements. This alienation of indirect democracy reveal its best features when it is necessary to deal with multiple variables.

When communication is mediated, two things are really important:

• Duty to listen to the views of others and to alternative versions of events.

• Participation in debate, closely linked to responsibility for the effects that go as the result of the actions.

Garnham claims that “the possibility of arriving at a rationally grounded consensus can only be demonstrated in practice by entering into a concrete and historically specific process of

rational debate with other human beings (...) the task is to cooperate in building the political, economic and communication institutions.”

(Garnham, 1996, p. 375)

The answer to postmodern critiques is:

Habermas’s work is not utopian, it is rather tragic. It recognizes the extreme fragility of human civilization and the

difficulty of sustaining the social bonds of mutual obligation, facing enmity of psychological, internal and external

forces.

Media trasformation in Baltic countries in 1987-1990

• The apearance of a new style of speaking in media (critics about soviet regime).

• Tendency towards democratization media content.

• The explosive growth of circulation of the press.

• Job market in the field of journalism expanded rapidly.

Leading Lithuanian Dailies Circulation 1990-2001.

Title Type OwnershipCirculation(thousands)

1990

Circulation(thous)

1995

Circulation(thous)

2001

Lietuvos rytasNational

dailyNational

shareholders523 70 49

RespublikaNational

dailyNational

shareholders122 48 42

Kauno dienaRegional

dailyOrkla Media

(Norway)113 57 42

Lietuvos žiniosNational

tabloidPrivate person  - -  25

Verslo žiniosBusiness

dailyBonnier Media Group (Sweden)

14 9 8

Circulation of Dailies in Estonia in 1987-2000

  1987 1988 1999 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Average Circulation

of one daily(in thousands)

63 68 76 83 64 31 23 19 16 17 15 16 18 20

Circulation ofdailies per 1,000inhabitants

406 433 486 528 411 199 183 186 162 173 178 175 189 182

Circulation of non-dailies per1,000 inhabitants

338 380 446 549 709 518 613 590 419 361 343 325 290 231

Media role in the emergence of a new public sphere

• Media is an important social mechanism used for the political breakthrough in the Baltic countries

• Media is like a source of encouragement to public action.

• Media can play a crucial role in mobilizing the masses

• Media is like a socializing agent, socializes people of common thinking about public demands

The public sphere and the political culture

• The participation in politics can be treated as participation in the public sphere. So public sphere has some common aspects with the political culture.

• Baltic countries in 1987-1990 can be characterized by a very active level of participation in politics.

• The period of national awakening in Baltics is usually called by theorists as a mythological stage of political culture.

Towards creating a more democratic public sphere

Some tasks:• to create more diversity in media content and in media

outlets numbers, that it should reflect different interests in society

• to enlarge the participation of marginalized society groups in public debates and politics

Nowadays is undergoing discussion about the public journalism idea, which concerns problems of democracy, equality, participation.Public journalism is defined as more practical efforts of journalists to encourage people to participate in public affairs.

Numbers of Newspapers and Magazines

in the Baltics, 1990-2000

Number of newspaper (titles) 1990 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

Estonia 165 146 119 102 109 105 109

Latvia 172 286 252 229 226 235 227

Lithuania 324 477 443 439 415 377 361

Number of magazines and other periodicals (titles)

Estonia 434 501 517 572 578 930 956

Latvia 243 235 229 273 266 262 325

Lithuania 159 321 351 378 412 418 465

Nations in Transit 2001 ratings for democratisation

CentralEurope

Average ofPoliticalprocess

Civil societyIndependent

media

Governanceand public

administrationDemocratization

Czech Republic 1.75 1.50 2.00 2.00 1.81

Hungary 1,25 1,25 2,25 3 1,94

Poland 1,25 1,25 1,5 1,75 1,44

Slovakia 2,25 2 2 2,75 2,25

Slovenia 1,75 1,75 1,75 2,5 1,94

Balkans          

Albania 4 4 4,25 4,25 4,13

Bosnia 4,75 4,5 4,5 6 4,94

Bulgaria 2 3,5 3,25 3,5 3,06

Croatia 3,25 2,75 3,5 3,5 3,25

Macedonia 3,75 3,75 3,75 3,75 3,75

Romania 3 3 3,5 3,75 3,31

Yugoslavia 4,75 4 4,5 5,25 4,63

Baltics          

Estonia 1,75 2,25 1,75 2,25 2

Latvia 1,75 2 1,75 2,25 1,94

Lithuania 1,75 1,75 1,75 2,5 1,94

CISAverage of

Politicalprocess

Civil societyIndependent

media

Governanceand public

administrationDemocratization

Armenia 5,5 3,5 4,75 4,5 4,56

Azerbaijan 5,75 4,5 5,75 6,25 5,56

Belarus 6,75 6,5 6,75 6,25 6,56

Georgia 4,5 4 3,5 4,75 4,19

Kazakhstan 6,25 5 6 5 5,56

Kyrgyzstan 5,75 4,5 5 5,25 5,13

Moldova 3,25 3,75 4,25 4,5 3,94

Russia 4,25 4 5,25 5 4,63

Tajikistan 5,25 5 5 6 5,44

Turkmenistan 7 7 7 6,75 6,94

Ukraine 4 3,75 5,25 4,75 4,44

Uzbekistan 6,75 6,5 6,75 6 6,5

Conclusions

• Public sphere can be seen as the network of media, educational, knowledge and opinion-forming institutions participating in political sphere. Here we can stress the mediated character of nowadays public sphere.

• Theorists of public sphere claim that the Western structure of public sphere is changing as the political map during last 20 years has changed a lot.

• The public sphere can consist of multiple small spheres. It is not homogeneous. So only in this way it can be called democratic.

• Media in the period of 1987-1990 in Baltic countries became a place for public debate over the emergence of a new public sphere in society.

• During the period of National Awakening in Baltics there was an explosion of press circulation, that shows the active participation in the public domain.

• Nowadays we observe the increasing diversity of newspaper titles but not the circulation. This is important going towards democracy because we can find more different opinions reflected in mediated public sphere. But the participation of people in the public sphere and politics is not of so high level. We face problems of access, marginalization.

• According to the democracy rating (consisted) among Central Europe countries Baltic countries are quite advanced: share third (Lithuania, Latvia) and fourth places (Estonia).