Public Opinion, Political Communication and the Internet
| Author | Heather Savigny |
| DOI | 10.1111/1467-9256.00152 |
| Published date | 01 February 2002 |
| Date | 01 February 2002 |
Public Opinion, Political
Communication and the Internet
Heather Savigny1
University of Birmingham
In contemporary society public opinion is generally mediated by the mass media, which has come
to encompass the Habermasian ‘public sphere’. This arena is now characterised by the conflict
between market and democratic principles, by competing interests of politicians and the media.
The presentation of information for debate becomes distorted. The opinion of the ‘public’ is no
longer created through deliberation, but is constructed through systems of communication, in
conflict with political actors, who seek to retain control of the dissemination of information. The
expansion of the internet as a new method of communication provides a potential challenge to
the primacy of the traditional media and political parties as formers of public opinion.
Introduction
Public opinion is crucial for political actors to maintain their legitimacy and political
authority. In contemporary modern liberal democratic society public opinion
is generally mediated by the mass media, either through the presentation of opinion
polls, or more generally in the reflection and/or creation of public opinion. Jürgen
Habermas provides a framework through which to analyse the relationship between
the media and public opinion formation. The ideals of Habermas’s notion of public
opinion in the public sphere are premised on the assumption of rational-critical
undistorted debate and universal access. Contemporary mass media encompass the
public sphere, but this arena is characterised by the conflict between market and
democratic principles, where media presentation of issues are distorted to gain atten-
tion, rather than to provide information. The ‘public’ is no longer created through
deliberation, but is constructed through systems of communication, in conflict with
political actors, who seek to retain control of the dissemination of information.
Whereas setting the context and parameters of the debate structuring public
opinion was traditionally within the remit of political parties, in contemporary poli-
tics political strategies are rarely pursued by actors without consideration of their
presentation and effect through the media. Technological advances have impacted
upon the nature of political activity and the political message itself (Blumler and
McQuail, 1968; Mancini and Swanson, 1996, pp. 4–6). Each technological com-
munication development has raised concerns in respect of its impact and influence
on public opinion. The internet is an instrument, as yet, largely outside of tradi-
tional elite control. This medium offers greater opportunities for individuals to
participate and embodies a challenge to the existing forums of debate. This article,
through a Habermasian framework, raises normative theoretical questions in
respect of the role of the internet in political communication and the construction,
reconstruction and expression of public opinion. Does the internet represent an
© Political Studies Association, 2002.
Published by Blackwell Publishers, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 1JF, UK and 350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148, USA
2
H E AT H E R S AV I G N Y
opportunity for democracy to be reinvigorated and for participation to become
more meaningful? Or is this new medium something to be harnessed by traditional
and new elites, and used in their own interests and in those of the status quo?
Public opinion
Legitimate government in modern liberal democratic states ideally represents,
reflects and responds to public opinion. However, there is considerable debate as
to what constitutes public opinion. The term tends to be used in the broader sense
as a representation of public consciousness or will, anything acted upon or ex-
pressed in public. Micro-level psychological perspectives offer procedural accounts
of individual opinion formation (Festinger, 1957, p. 3), whilst macrolevel
approaches offer an holistic analysis (Lippman, 1954 [1922], p. 11; Noelle-
Neuman, 1984, p. 6), and attempts are made to quantify opinion through the usage
of polls (see, for example, Moon, 1999, pp. 2–4). A normative perspective of public-
opinion formation is provided by Habermas. He argues that the ‘public sphere’ is
the site where public opinion is formed and expressed. The ‘public sphere’ is the
point at which state and civil society interact. Individuals come together to reflect
critically, through reasoned debate, in public, on themselves and the practices of
the state (Habermas, 1996 [1962], p. 24). Through deliberation and justification,
the norms and values that underpin the governance of society emerge. These are
then considered valid if they gain the consent of others within the community,
promoting consensus and cohesion, rather than fragmentation.
This rational deliberation was characterised by freedom of speech, universal access
and inclusiveness, and was neither state nor market controlled. Habermas charts
the transformation of this site of rational-critical debate, demonstrating how the
political task of the public sphere became the regulation of civil society (Habermas,
1996 [1962], p. 52). As the mass media have come to encompass this ‘public
sphere’ (ibid., p. 188), implications for the formation of public opinion arise. Whilst
increased accessibility to the media and market...
To continue reading
Request your trial