THE INTERNATIONAL PEN

‘Critiques on the Participatory Potentials of Web 2.0’ is one of the chapter of Communication, Culture & Critique which written by Cammaerts. We can easily see from its title that the author queries whether Web 2.0 could provide a platform for participatory media.

 

The prominent advantage of this article is that its structure is really clear. Firstly, the author states the link between blogging and Habermassian public sphere. Then it comes to the transition. Because of the unclear definition of political and blogging has distinction between theoretically and practically, there are still many obstruction to access to democracy and freedom in blogosphere. In author’s words, it is ‘all too easy to regard the blog phenomenon exclusively in terms of the democratic and participatory potentials and/or the emancipator agency of individuals’ (p. 360). I was impressed by five main reasons which limit the democratic and participative potential of the blogosphere. By using subtitles, it makes the article more structured and makes its argument more convincible. As far as I understand, its first limitation is blog being controlled by market that makes blog become commercial again as mainstream media. Secondly, in some cases, bloggers are intervened by state and intimidated by employers that destroy the freedom of users in blog. Thirdly, some political and cultural elites’ blogs may cover up the voices from ordinary people. In terms of individual level, author claims that there are intimidations within the blogosphere itself. Some radical conflicts and antidemocratic voices exist frequently in blogging. While stating each limitation, the author provides one or more examples in each part which makes the readers easier to understand. In sum, the author makes a good point that blogosphere is more like an ‘agonistic and antagonistic public sphere’ rather than ‘Habermassian consensual public sphere’ (p. 373). It claims the essential element that distinguishes Habermassian public sphere and blogosphere. The disadvantage of this article is that it does not come up a clear conclusion whether blogging has participatory potentials or not. Also, in my opinion, propaganda model should be mentioned in this article especially when it talks to organizational level’s limitation.

 

However, it cannot be denied that this article is really useful for analysing Web 2.0 especially blogging. Specifically, it provides a deep analysis about democracy and participatory in Web 2.0. In order to claim Web 2.0 gives citizens an illusion of democracy and participatory which seems to renaissance public sphere. As I was preparing for my essay about ‘Evaluate whether citizen journalism or Blogging can help to reinvigorate the public sphere’, I found this article is really useful for reference. However, it stands more for against that blogging can help to reinvigorate the public sphere. All in all, I think this article is appropriate for analysing digital media especially Web 2.0.

 

 

Reference: Cammaerts, B. 2008. Communication, Culture & Critique. 1: 358-377.