An Overview of Research on the European Public Sphere (original) (raw)
Related papers
Understanding the European Public Sphere: A review of pending challenges in research
European Politics and Society, 2021
This paper seeks to present a theoretical development of the main lines of research that have addressed the emergence of a European Public Sphere (EPS). To this end, the outcomes of the literature are organized into three main categories: political communication in the European Union (EU), the role of digital platforms in a potential public sphere, and the progressive politicization of the EU. Finally, a range of pending challenges are identified. Facing them will help improve research in this field. The increasing politicization of ‘Europe’ as a topic in the literature and the constant use of digital platforms encourage a European public opinion, which acts together on certain issues beyond the institutional framework. The studies of the coming years have the challenge of combining these variables as well as broadening methodological and theoretical models.
The Democratic Function of the Public Sphere in Europe
German Law Journal
Democratically legitimized European integration calls for developments in culture and society—which arise naturally in the scope of on-going political, economic and institutional European Union (EU) integration—to be publically debated so they may be politically processed. The space where this happens is the public sphere, or, in the context of the EU, the European public sphere. The latter complements national public spheres. Successful integration among EU Member States is made possible by adhering to a common set of values at the same time as respecting the national identities of the Member States and fostering cultural diversity. By way of Union citizenship rights, individuals are able to make use of and actively promote the Europeanization of societies and cultures. Yet citizens are affected by Europeanization to differing degrees, with only a minority of citizens actively partaking in transnational exchange. In order to account for European integration democratically, the EU t...
The European Public Sphere and the Deficit of Democracy
This chapter explores a threefold European deficit: a democratic deficit, a deficit in European identity, and a deficit in the European public sphere. It argues that although interests such as social movements have most leverage at the national level, since this is the level at which the media are largely organised, the emergence of distinctively 'European' issues such as BSE means that national cycles of media attention are becoming increasingly synchronised. This makes it more likely that a homogenisation of issues and opinion will occur at the European level. This would favour the eventual emergence of a supranational identity. The creation of a European public sphere through the synchronisation and homogenisation of cycles of media attention on contentious 'European' issues is a more realistic prospect than direct attempts to create a 'new European' identity through public education or the legal system.
The European Public Sphere – Barriers and Limitations
Zeszyty Prasoznawcze, 2018
The European public sphere appears only incidentally and temporarily and even then, European issues are presented through the prism of national benefits or loss. All of this is not conducive to the creation of a European identity, nor the legitimization of EU. Should the media and the journalists be blamed for this state of affairs? How do they perceive their role in the process of European integration? Where, in their opinion, are the causes, which render the creation of a European public sphere impossible? This article will present the results of individual depth interviews (IDI) conducted with German press journalists (16).
Conceptualizing European Public Spheres
2004
The development of post-national democracy in Europe depends on the development of an overarching communicative space that functions as a public sphere, viz., a common room created by speakers who are discussing common affairs in front of an audience. This is a place where opinions ideally are formed and changed according to a communicative mode or interaction. The point of departure is Habermas' seminal work on the public sphere from 1962. The author examines the aptness of his recent reformulation of the concept (1992/1996), which is found to be too 'thin'. Further, he distinguishes between a general public sphere, segmented publics and strong publics and clarifies their potential conduciveness to democratic government. General publics are inclusive and open communicative spaces rooted in civil society in the periphery of the political system. Such a sphere is found wanting at the supranational level in Europe. Rather what is discovered are transnational, segmented publics evolving around policy networks constituted by the common interest in certain issues, problems and solutions. The EU also has many strong publics, viz. legally institutionalized discourses specialized on collective will-formation close to the center of the political system.
The European Public Sphere Does Not Exist (At Least It's Worth Wondering
2009
This article argues that most research conducted on the topic of the European public sphere (EPS) has been heavily influenced by a definition of the public sphere that has been historically promoted by the European Union institutions themselves. Communication and, later on, public opinion have been considered by EU pioneers as ways to overcome the limited competences of the European institutions. By doing so, they heavily influenced later theories of the European public sphere by promoting a conception of the latter based on two major assumptions: the EPS relies on the availability of information about the EU in national media and all EU citizens are members of the EPS. This article proposes alternative research paths about the EPS. The EPS should probably not be thought of in terms of the national media of the member states, nor should it be conceived as including all EU citizens. Rather, the EPS appears as sectoral, heavily selective and including actors from various professional and policies areas that have, in common, a strong interest in EU matters.
Based on the theoretical and empirical knowledge about the European public sphere, we discuss the theoretical problems by reviewing different theoretical models, their normative implications and the consequences for empirical studies, who are characterized by an empirical heterogeneity. In the second part we focus on the problems of theory, especially on the question of avoiding to simply extend our notions of national democracy to the European level and the alienability of theories to the European Union. We discuss the three categories of actors of the public sphere and draw conclusions for further research. We give reasons for a re-definition of the relevant fields of discourse and a re-definition of media functions in a European context.