With the creation of the Internet, the expectation by users was that it would bring an unprecedented social realm for free speech. As described by Habermas, the Public Sphere is made up of private people gathered together as a public and discussing the needs of society. However, the debate of whether the Internet is an example of a Public Sphere, is still being evaluated. Greg Goldberg expresses that the Internet is at a tipping point; it will either be labeled as a recreated Public Sphere or it could become absorbed into the capitalist commercial culture (Goldberg, 2010). This fight for the digital space is ongoing, with various social activists struggling to keep the Internet free and away from state and corporate control. Theorists have attempted to label this space as either a digital Public Sphere or a digital marketing platform, but the Internet is an unprecedented phenomenon, which one currently cannot define. In 2011, Aaron Swartz a former MIT student and political activist began a digital crusade to stop the passing of an Internet regulation bill and a battle to keep the digital space free. This bill was titled SOPA. Using citizen media, Swartz produced a critical speech titled Freedom to Connect, to spread his message, and under #FreedomtoConnect, he began his political movement. In this inspirational speech he highlighted that if the government “wanted to come up with some way… to shut down access to particular websites, [SOPA] might be the only way [they could] do it” (para. 17). One senator claimed, “people on the Internet, think they can get away with anything…[t]here’s [has] to be laws on the Internet! It’s [has] to be under control!" (para. 15) This statement was very alarming, even after the bill was eliminated, large media outlets still refused to cover the story, as if it was not a critical issue (para. 16).
Media conglomerates tasked with informing the public, on SOPA, were rather utilized as a tool to frame the bill as unimportant, in order for it to be easily passed. However, this strange behaviour did not surprise John Fiske, who explains, “that our media resources are limited and will always be so, [as long as] they are [commercially] reliant on corporate sponsorship” (Fiske, 1996). However, regardless of the lack of media focus, the #FreedomtoConnect campaign blossomed, within a couple weeks 300, 000 individuals signed the online petition to end the controversial bill. As described by John Downing “the vast variety of social movement media, operating in direct relation to…social change, represents our best prospect for an alternative, counter hegemonic public sphere” (2010).
Swartz was a strong believer that the World Wide Web should be free and that the flow of information should be accessible to everyone, free of state and corporate control. He used citizen media as his main pillar for this political movement, realizing that these outlets enable citizens to engage with thoughts outside of the prototypical frameworks of society’s institutions (Warner, 2002). Thus, providing individuals with information that is both produced and driven by regular individuals, like himself (Atton, 2003). Swartz was able to organize and successfully facilitate an online movement, which “is hard to predict, let alone engineer” (Morozov, 2011) The defining process for the Internet is still on going but Swartz died fighting for the possibility of a free digital Public Sphere.Work Cited:
Atton, Chris. “What is ‘Alternative’ Journalism?” Journalism, 4:3, 2003. 267-272
Fiske, John. “Los Angeles: A Tale of Three Videos,” in Media Matters: Politics: Everyday Culture and Political Change, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1996.
Goldberg, Greg. “Rethinking the Public/Virtual Sphere: The Problem with Participation,” New Media & Society, 13:5, 2011. 739-754.
Warner, Michael. “Publics and Counterpublics (abbreviated version)” in the Quarterly Journal of Speech, 88:4, 2002. 413-425
No comments:
Post a Comment