Tabloidization and Commercialization of Public Sphere Essay

Introduction

Public sphere is changeable and with the development of the world these changes may not be avoid. The development of the media and democracy in the modern world leads to the significant development and attitude within the public sphere. The tabloidization and commercialization of public sphere through media makes it print on public relations, which is considered to be dangerous, especially within the commercialized public sphere, moreover, the growth of democratic enfranchisement and anti-democratic attempts to destroy public spheres, create pseudo-public spheres, public opinion and publics, which also affect the public relations.

Tabloidization and commercialization of public sphere through media

Media plays a crucial role in people’s life, as in the world of information technologies the tabloidization and commercialization of public sphere may never be avoid. Media, as well as the public sphere, is centered on the political sphere these notions make media tabloidized and commercialized. The development of political life in the world led to the fact that media channels, without speaking about programs and advertizing, “reflect the existing balance of political forces and the existing political agenda” (Garnham 361). All the political advertizing is commercialized and people do not have right whether to see it or not, as during the period of political activity, elections for example, all the advertizing becomes symbolical, and in every slogan the politics may be seen.

There is the tendency to tabloidization of the media, which means the shift from the politics and turn to the entertainment spheres of people’s life. News reality frame becomes the center for advertizing and this news reality frame “is a decontextualized account based in a different frame story” (Bennett 173). The danger of such new tabloidization of the media is that the reality is deformed, and mass media may use the information in news reality frame as it wants. The commercialization of the media adds to the same dangerous effect as powerful people may implement their ideas in the necessary context for their own benefit. This is the world perception of media, which usually is the unconditioned trust to what is said in the media. The events are introduced to the public in entertaining form, for better perception and the invisibleness of the hidden real context.

Considering the tabloidization, commercialization and politization of the media, the word propaganda must be mentioned, as all the activities are provided with this only aim. All campaigns, directed on this or that issue, is a propaganda, which contains “any association, systematic scheme, or concerted movement for the propagation of a particular doctrine or practice” (Bernays 11). Noting this definition, the conclusion is that all advertizing and information, which appears in media, is propaganda, and public sphere consumes this propaganda through entertaining programs and other information, which is introduced to the public by low-pressure advertising, but in fact has a huge influence on people’s understanding of surrounding atmosphere.

Returning to the political ads, it should be pointed that people have used to be influenced by the media, that they not notice anymore that all their life is structured according to the mass media influence, and that the information is further received on subconscious level, which direct people’s actions and thinking to the influenced part. Journalists’ perception of information is important as all the information they provide come through them, and “to whatever extent journalists view themselves as reporting for the democratic citizenry, they cover the news from a citizen’s perspective only in a limited fashion” (Gans 48). Gans (2004) also states that the media ia probably the best thought of as a modern equivalent for evil spirits, for the actual mass media are larger in number and transmit an equally larger and often contradictory variety of message” (70). This opinion adds to the said that journalists usually transmit the information through themselves and give their understanding of the heard, while public percepts all that and are influenced to a high degree.

The relationship between the growth of democratic enfranchisement and anti-democratic attempts to destroy public spheres

The growth of democratic enfranchisement (right to vote and take part in public life — to be a free citizen) and anti-democratic attempts to destroy public spheres, create pseudo-public spheres, public opinion and publics, where the influence of media and other public issues is great. The development of democratic thought in the society exists and people choose by themselves, whether “to impart and receive information” (Garnham 364) or to avoid it. But in most cases, people are influences, without even understanding that influence. Taking the propaganda, people have used to it, and during the political activity they perceive the information unconsciously, but the information is perceived and public has been already impacted, and it is possible to provide other ideas and considerations, to deep the propaganda influence (Bernays 12).

Analyzing the Lippmann’s understanding of the modern world, he states that people perceive it by means of “pictures in our heads” (in Ewen 146) and these pictures become “more and more prevalent” (Ewen 148). Moreover, this perception of the world through the pictures is universal and same for all. The result from this commonness and universality of the people’s pictured world is that public is mostly influenced by the same ideas through public. On this issue, the pseudo-environment is created, which creates virtual reality and people are informed by ordinary thought and behavior. The ideas, by which public is influences, are common, and their reaction to the information is mostly common, so the same people’s reaction is predictable. The other Lippmann’s consideration is that people live according “to the medium of fiction” (Ewen 148) biased and in two directions. First, people are inspired by the political ideas, and second, the society lives according to conditioned reflexes (Ewen 149). These ideas are reasonable and analyzing people’s behavior and thinking it is impossible to contradict Lippmann’s conclusions, as people really exist in the pseudo-publics, with pseudo-public spheres and opinion, which is not created by people themselves, but is provided by the mass media and other influential aspects of people’s life.

The possibility for creation of such pseudo-realities lies in the very definition of public. Warner (2002) insists that public is the synonym to common. People have common views, interests, ideas and considerations, which influence their life (65). The possibility of Lippmann’s consideration is possible to understand better if to repel from Warner’s understanding of public. Public has three distinct issues, which differ it just from people gathering, that is the state, the official of paid employment and arenas for public discussion (Fraser 110). These notions also make the democracy existence. Modern life is democratic, and democracy is seen though the activities, which are allowed to people, but at the same time, these democracies are limited by people’s influence by media and other issues, which function on subconscious level.

Analyzing the public sphere, Habermas states that there are two crosscutting processes, “the communicative generation of legitimate power on the one hand and the manipulative deployment of media power to produce mass loyalty, consumer demand, and compliance with systemic imperatives on the other” (452). Coming out of these processes in the public sphere, Habermas is sure that the modern life is “totalitarianism with its focus on communication” (454). All mentioned propaganda and media impact make the modern society not democratic, but totalitarian, as people are not given the information and the choice whether to use it or not, they are impacted by this information and the decisions, on a large scale, as the decisions have already been made by people who provide the information on people. The modern scheme should be changes and people should be given the opportunity either to be influenced by information, or not.

In conclusion, media in the modern world plays one of the most significant parts as people are occupied by it in such a way that they are unable to make up their own decision and just follow the social opinion. People live in the pseudo-public society, and occupied by the pseudo-public opinion ad people in this society are not real, they do not provide their thinking, they just impose what they are said and follow the instructions. Such condition became possible with the tabloidization and commercialization of public sphere by media, which the main deliverer of information and at the same time the people’s mind constructors. The pseudo-reality in the society became possible with the appearance of tabloidization, the introducing of the events as entertaining information, and commercialization, the desire to get more benefit from advertizing and the information, which is introduced on TV.

Works Cited

Bennett, W. Lance. “News as reality TV: election coverage and the democratization of truth.” Critical studies in media communication, 22 (2), pp. 171-177.

Bernays, Edward L. Propaganda. New York: Ig Publishing, 2004

Ewen, Stuart. PR! A Social History of Spin. New York: Basic Books, 1996.

Fraser, Nancy. “Rethinking the public sphere: a contribution to the critique of actual existing democracy” in Habermas and the public sphere by Craig J. Calhoun. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996, pp. 109-142.

Gans, Herbert J. Democracy and the news. Oxford: Oxford University Press US, 2004.

Garnham, Nicolas. “The media and the public sphere” in Habermas and the public sphere by Craig J. Calhoun. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996, pp. 359-376.

Habermas, Jurgen. “Further reflections on the public sphere” in Habermas and the public sphere by Craig J. Calhoun. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1996, pp. 421-461.

Warner, Michael. Publics and counterpublics. New York: Zone Books, 2002.