The European Public Sphere and the Internet

Chapter

Abstract

The idea of the “European public sphere” is part of the ongoing discussion about European integration and the further development of the European system of democratic governance. The question of whether there can be an overarching European public sphere alongside the existing national public spheres in European member states is the subject of lively scientific and political debate. In several publications on European Governance, the European Commission has clearly stated that it regards the “inadequate development” of a European public sphere and the public’s disenchantment with EU politics as deficiencies of European democracy. This chapter summarises the debate concerning the need for a transnational European public sphere and how to develop this as an integral, intermediate, democratic structure between European policy-making institutions and the European constituency. Conceptual arguments are discussed concerning the role of the public sphere and related concepts—citizenship and civil society—in transnational democratic governance, and empirical evidence is provided for the Europeanization of the political public sphere. This is set against a consideration of political communication on the Internet and the Internet’s potential to support the emergence of transnational forms of citizenship and transnational political publics.

References

  1. Albrecht, S. (2010). Reflexionsspiele. Deliberative Demokratie und die Wirklichkeit politischer Diskurse im Internet. Bielefeld, Germany: Transkript.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Armstrong, K. A. (2006). Inclusive governance—Civil society and the open method of co-ordination. In S. Smismans (Ed.), Civil society and legitimate European governance (pp. 42–67). Cheltenham, England: Elgar.Google Scholar
  3. Bärenreuter, C., Brüll, C., Mokre, M., & Wahl-Jorgensen, K. (2009). An overview of research on the European public sphere. Eurosphere Working Paper Series. Online Working Paper No. 03.Google Scholar
  4. Bennet, L. (2003). Communicating global activism—Strengths and vulnerabilities of networked politics. Information, Communication and Society, 6(2), 143–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bohman, J. (2004). Expanding dialogue: The Internet, the public sphere and prospects for transnational democracy. Sociological Review, 52, 131–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bohman, J. (2007). Democracy across borders: From Demos to Demoi. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  7. Brüggemann, M. (2005). How the EU constructs the European public sphere: Seven strategies on information policy. TranState Working Papers No. 19, University of Bremen.Google Scholar
  8. Brüggemann, M., Sifft, S., Kleinen-von Königslöw, K., Peters, B., & Wimmel, A. (2006). Segmented Europeanisation—The transnationalisation of public spheres in Europe: Trends and patterns. TransState Working Papers No. 37, University of Bremen.Google Scholar
  9. Cammaerts, B., & Van Audenhove, L. (2005). Online political debate, unbounded citizenship, and the problematic nature of a transnational public sphere. Political Communication, 22(2), 179–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  11. Castells, M. (2001). The Internet galaxy—Reflections on the Internet, business and society. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Cohen, J., & Sabel, C. (1997). Directly deliberative polyarchy. European Law Journal, 3(4), 313–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Commission of the European Union. (2001). European governance. A White Paper, COM (2001) 428 final. Brussels.Google Scholar
  14. Commission of the European Union. (2005). The Commission’s contribution to the period of reflection and beyond: Plan-D for democracy, dialogue and debate. Communication from the Commission to the Council, The European Parliament, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, COM (2005) 494 final. Brussels.Google Scholar
  15. Commission of the European Union. (2006, February 1). White paper on a European communication policy. COM (2006) 35 final version, Brussels.Google Scholar
  16. Dahlberg, L. (2007). The Internet, deliberative democracy, and power: Radicalizing the public sphere. International Journal of Media and Cultural Politics, 3(1), 47–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dahlgren, P. (2005). The Internet, public spheres, and political communication: Dispersion and deliberation. Political Communication, 22(2), 147–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Eder, K. (2003). Integration through culture? The paradox of the search for a European identity. In K. Eder & B. Giesen (Eds.), European citizenship—National legacies and transnational projects (pp. 221–244). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Eder, K. (2007). The public sphere and European democracy: Mechanisms of democratisation in the transnational situation. In J. E. Fossum & P. Schlesinger (Eds.), The European Union and the public sphere—A communicative space in the making? (pp. 44–64). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  20. Eder, K., & Giesen, B. (Eds.). (2003). European citizenship—National legacies and transnational projects. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Eilders, C., & Voltmer, K. (2003). Zwischen Deutschland und Europa. Eine empirische Untersuchung zum Grad von Europäisierung und Europa-Unterstützung der meinungsführenden deutschen Tageszeitungen. Medien & Kommunikationswissenschaft, 51(2), 250–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Eriksen, E. O. (2007). Conceptualising European public spheres: General, segmented and strong publics. In J. E. Fossum & P. Schlesinger (Eds.), The European Union and the public sphere—A communicative space in the making? (pp. 23–43). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Eurosphere. (2013). Linking the European Union with the citizens. Evaluation of EU policies aiming to create a democratic European Public Sphere. In Eurosphere—Final comparative study (Vol. 1). Bergen, Norway: University of Bergen.Google Scholar
  24. Fossum, J. E., & Schlesinger, P. (2007). Introduction. In J. E. Fossum & P. Schlesinger (Eds.), The European Union and the public sphere—A communicative space in the making? (pp. 1–20). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Frazer, N. (1992). Rethinking the public sphere: A contribution to the critique of actually existing democracy. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  26. Frazer, N. (2007). Transnationalising the public sphere—On the legitimacy and efficacy of public opinion in a post-Westphalian world. Theory, Culture and Society, 24(4), 7–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Friedrich, D. (2013). European governance and the deliberative challenge. In R. Kies & P. Nanz (Eds.), Is Europe listening to us? Successes and failures of EU citizen consultations (pp. 35–56). Farnham, England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  28. Gerhards, J. (2000). Europäisierung von Ökonomie und Politik und die Trägheit der Entstehung einer europäischen Öffentlichkeit. In M. Bach (Ed.), Die Europäisierung nationaler Gesellschaften. Sonderheft 40 der Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie (pp. 277–305). Wiesbaden, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.Google Scholar
  29. Giesen, B., & Eder, K. (2003). European citizenship. An avenue for the social integration of Europe. In K. Eder & B. Giesen (Eds.), European citizenship—National legacies and transnational projects (pp. 1–13). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Gonzáles Bailón, S. (2011, May 26). Title missing. STOA Workshop at the European Parliament, Brussels.Google Scholar
  31. Grimm, D. (2004). Treaty or constitution? The legal basis of the European Union after Maastricht. In E. O. Eriksen, J. E. Fossum, & A. J. Menéndez (Eds.), Developing a constitution for Europe (pp. 69–87). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  32. Grunwald, A., Banse, G., Coenen, C., & Hennen, L. (2006). Netzöffentlichkeit und digitale Demokratie. Tendenzen politischer Kommunikation im Internet. Studien des Büros für Technikfolgen-Abschätzung beim deutschen Bundestag, Bd. 18, Berlin, Germany.Google Scholar
  33. Habermas, J. (1992). Further reflections on the public sphere. In C. Calhoun (Ed.), Habermas and the public sphere. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  34. Habermas, J. (1996). Between facts and norms: Contributions to a discourse theory of law and democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  35. Habermas, J. (2001). So, why does Europe need a constitution? Florence, Italy: European University Institute, Robert Schuman Centre of Advanced Studies.Google Scholar
  36. Kaldor, M. (2003). The idea of global civil society. International Affairs, 79(3), 583–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kantner, C. (2006). Collective identity as shared ethical self-understanding: The case of the emerging European identity. European Journal of Social Theory, 9(4), 501–523.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Keohane, R. O., & Nye, J. S. (1998). Power and independence in the information age. Foreign Affairs, 77(5), 81–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Kies, R., Leyenaar, M., & Niemöller, K. (2013). European citizens consultation: A large consultation on a vague topic. In R. Kies & P. Nanz (Eds.), Is Europe listening to us? Successes and failures of EU citizen consultations (pp. 59–78). Farnham, England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  40. Kies, R., & Nanz, P. (Eds.). (2013a). Is Europe listening to us? Successes and failures of EU citizen consultations. Farnham, England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  41. Kies, R., & Nanz, P. (2013b). Introduction. In R. Kies & P. Nanz (Eds.), Is Europe listening to us? Successes and failures of EU citizen consultations (pp. 1–14). Farnham, England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  42. Koopmans, R. (2007). Who inhabits the European public sphere? Winners and losers, supporters and opponents in Europeanised political debates. European Journal of Political Research, 46(2), 183–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Koopmans, R., & Statham, P. (2010). The making of a European public sphere: Political communication and collective action in an area of European governance. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Latzer, M., & Sauerwein, F. (2006). Europäisierung durch Medien: Ansätze und Erkenntnisse der Medienforschung. In W. R. Langenbucher & M. Latzer (Eds.), Europäische Öffentlichkeit und medialer Wandel. Eine transdisziplinäre Perspektive (pp. 10–45). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Levidow, L., & Marris, C. (2001). Science and governance in Europe: Lessons from the case of agricultural biotechnology. Science and Public Policy, 28(5), 345–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Liebert, U., & Trenz, H. J. (2011). The ‘new politics of European civil society’: Conceptual, normative and empirical issues. In U. Liebert & H. J. Trenz (Eds.), The new politics of European civil society (pp. 1–16). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  47. Lindner, R. (2007). Politischer Wandel durch digitale Netzwerkkommunikation? Strategische Anwendung neuer Kommunikationstechnologien durch kanadische Parteien und Interessengruppen. Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.Google Scholar
  48. Magnette, P. (2006). Democracy in the European Union: Why and how to combine representation and participation? In S. Smismans (Ed.), Civil society and legitimate European governance (pp. 23–41). Cheltenham, England: Elgar.Google Scholar
  49. Majone, G. D. (1996). Regulating Europe. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Marshall, T. H. (1950). Citizenship and social class. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  51. Meyer, C. O. (1999). Political legitimacy and the invisibility of politics: Exploring the European Union’s communication deficit. Journal of Common Market Studies, 37(4), 617–639.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Neidhardt, F. (2006). Europäische Öffentlichkeit als Prozess. Anmerkungen zum Forschungsstand. In W. R. Langenbucher & M. Latzer (Eds.), Europäische Öffentlichkeit und medialer Wandel. Eine transdiziplinäre Perspektive (pp. 46–62). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Pfetsch, B. (2004). The voice of the media in European public sphere: Comparative analysis of newspaper editorials. Integrated Report WP 3.Google Scholar
  54. Rasmussen, T. (2008). The Internet and differentiation in the public sphere. Nordicom Review, 29(2), 73–83.Google Scholar
  55. Rasmussen, T. (2013). Internet-based media, Europe and the political public sphere. Media, Culture and Society, 35(1), 97–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Risse, T. (2003). An emerging European public sphere? Theoretical clarifications and empirical indicators. Paper presented to the annual meeting of the European Studies Association (EUSA), Nashville TN, March 27–30.Google Scholar
  57. Scharpf, F. W. (1999). Governing in Europe: Effective and democratic? Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Schlesinger, P. (2007). A fragile cosmopolitanism: On the unresolved ambiguities of the European public sphere. In J. Fossum & P. Schlesinger (Eds.), The European Union and the public sphere: A communicative space in the making? (pp. 65–84). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  59. Schmitter, P. C. (2003). The scope of citizenship in a democratised European Union. In K. Eder & B. Giesen (Eds.), European citizenship—National legacies and transnational projects (pp. 86–121). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  60. Shaw, J. (1997). Citizenship of the Union: Towards a post-national membership? Jean Monet Working Papers. Harvard Law School.Google Scholar
  61. Shore, C. (2004). Whither European citizenship? Eros and civilisation revisited. European Journal of Social Theory, 7(1), 27–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Sicakkan, H. (2013). Diversity and the European public sphere—Towards a citizens’ Europe (Eurosphere—Final comparative study, Vol. 3). Bergen, Norway: University of Bergen.Google Scholar
  63. Smismans, S. (2006a). Civil society and European governance: From concepts to research agenda. In S. Smismans (Ed.), Civil society and legitimate European governance (pp. 3–22). Cheltenham, England: Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Smismans, S. (2006b). Civil society and legitimate European governance. Cheltenham, England: Elgar.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Smith, G. (2013). Designing democratic innovations at the European level: Lessons from the experiments. In R. Kies & P. Nanz (Eds.), Is Europe listening to us? Successes and failure of EU citizen consultations (pp. 201–216). Farnham, England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  66. Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalization and culture. Cambridge, England: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  67. Trenz, H. J. (2004). Media coverage on European governance—Exploring the European public sphere in national quality papers. European Journal of Communication, 19(3), 291–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Trenz, H. J. (2008). In search of the European public sphere. Between normative overstretch and empirical disenchantment. RECON Online Working Paper.Google Scholar
  69. Trenz, H. J., & Eder, K. (2004). The democratizing dynamics of a European public sphere—Towards a theory of democratic functionalism. European Journal of Social Theory, 7(1), 5–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Van der Heijden, H.-A. (2010). Social movements, public spheres and the European politics of the environment: Green power Europe? Basingstoke, England: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Wessler, H., Peters, B., Brüggemann, M., Kleinen von Königslöw, K., & Sifft, S. (2008). Transnationalisation of public spheres. New York: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Winkler, R., Kozeluh, U., & Brandstetter, G. (2006). Deliberation im europäischen Kontext: Online Debatten und Online Konsultationen auf der EU Platform “Your Voice in Europe”. In W. R. Langenbucher & M. Latzer (Eds.), Europäische Öffentlichkeit und medialer Wandel. Eine transdisziplinäre Perspektive (pp. 378–400). Wiesbaden, Germany: VS Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Winter, R. (2010). Widerstand im Netz. Zur Herausbildung einer transnationalen Öffentlichkeit durch netzbasierte Kommunikation. Bielefeld, Germany: Transkript.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Yang, M. (2013). Europe’s new communication policy and the introduction of transnational deliberative citizen’s involvement projects. In R. Kies & P. Nanz (Eds.), Is Europe listening to us? Successes and failures of EU citizen consultations (pp. 17–24). Farnham, England: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  75. Zimmermann, A., & Favell, A. (2010). Governmentality, political field or public sphere? Theoretical alternatives in the political sociology of the EU. European Journal of Social Theory, 14(4), 489–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Zimmermann, A., Koopmanns, R., & Schlecht, T. (2004). Political communication on the Internet. Link structure among political actors in Europe. Berlin, Germany: WZB.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Karlsruhe Institute of Technology (KIT), Institute for Technology Assessment and Systems Analysis (ITAS)BonnGermany

Personalised recommendations