Democratic conceptions of politics are tacitly or explicitly predicated upon a functioning arena for the formation of public opinion in an associated media-space. Policy-making thus requires a reliable connection to processes of ‘public’ will formation. These processes formed the focus for Habermas’s influential study on the public sphere. This contribution presents a look at more recent ‘structural transformation’, the causes of which are by no means limited to social media communication, and examines its consequences. It proceeds in three steps: 1) in some proximity to Habermas, but also by means of the theory of resonance, it seeks to determine the kind of public sphere that a democratic polity requires; 2) an analysis of problems within the contemporary public sphere will feed into 3) a discussion of the conditions for the restoration of a ‘functioning political public sphere’. These include changes in the realms of participation, representation and spaces of encounter.
ArendtH (1958) Kultur und Politik. In: ArendtH, Zwischen Vergangenheit und Zukunft. Übungen im politischen Denken. München: Piper, pp. 277–302.
2.
ArendtH (1998) The Human Condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3.
BarberB (1992) Strong Democracy: Participatory Politics for a New Age. Berkeley: University of California Press.
4.
BoczkowskiPJPapacharissiZ (eds) (2018) Trump and the Media. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
5.
BorgesiusF, et al. (2016) Should we worry about filter bubbles?Internet Policy Review. Journal on Internet Regulation5(1). https://doi.org/10.14763/2016.1.401
6.
BourdieuP (2010) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgment of Taste. London: Routledge.
7.
BuchsteinH (2018) Auf dem Weg zur Postwachstumsgesellschaft – Von der Resonanztheorie zur aleatorischen Demokratie. Berliner Journal für Soziologie28: 209–236.
8.
ColleoniERozzaAArvidssonA (2014) Echo chamber or public sphere? Predicting political orientation and measuring political homophily in Twitter using big data. Journal of Communication64: 317–332.
9.
DawsonMC (2006) After the deluge: Publics and publicity in Katrina’s wake. Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race3: 239–249.
10.
DeanJ (2003) Why the net is not a public sphere. Constellations10: 95–112.
11.
DörreKFraserN, et al. (2019) Was stimmt nicht mit der Demokratie? Eine Debatte, ed. KettererHBeckerK. Berlin: Suhrkamp.
12.
ElsässerLHenseSSchäferA (2017) ‘Dem Deutschen Volke’? Die ungleiche Responsivität des deutschen Bundestags. Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft27: 161–180.
13.
FishkinJS (1995) The Voice of the People: Public Opinion and Democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.
14.
FishkinJSLuskinRC (2005) Experimenting with a democratic ideal: Deliberative polling and public opinion. Acta Politica40: 284–298.
15.
FlaxmanSGoelSRaoJM (2016) Filter bubbles, echo chambers, and online news consumption. Public Opinion Quarterly80: 298–320.
16.
GenoveseMAStrebMJ (eds) (2004) Polls and Politics: The Dilemmas of Democracy. Albany: State University of New York Press.
17.
GoodhartD (2017) The Road to Somewhere: The New Tribes Shaping British Politics. London: Penguin Books.
18.
HabermasJ (1989 [1962]) The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere. Cambridge: Polity.
19.
HabermasJ (1986) The Theory of Communicative Action, 2 vols. Cambridge: Polity.
20.
HabermasJ (1990) Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit (rev. edn with a new foreword). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
21.
HabermasJ (1998) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22.
HedayatifarL, et al. (2019) US social fragmentation at multiple scales. Journal of the Royal Society Interface16. http://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2019.0509
23.
HennisW (1999 [1957]) Meinungsforschung und repräsentative Demokratie. Zur Kritik politischer Umfragen. Reprinted in: HennisW, Regieren im modernen Staat. Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, pp. 37–88.
24.
KatebG (2000) Aestheticism and morality: Their cooperation and hostility. Political Theory28: 5–37.
25.
KielmanseggPG (1977) Volkssouveränität. Eine Untersuchung der Bedingungen demokratischer Legitimität. Stuttgart: Klett.
26.
KitchensBJohnsonSLGrayP (2020) Understanding echo chambers and filter bubbles: The impact of social media on diversification and partisan shifts in news consumption. MIS Quarterly44: 1619–1649.
27.
KörösényiA (2005) Political representation in leader democracy. Government and Opposition40: 358–378.
28.
LaraMP (2021) Beyond the Public Sphere: Film and the Feminist Imaginary. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.
29.
LoveN (2006) Musical Democracy. Albany: State University of New York Press.
30.
KronauerMSiebelW (eds) (2013) Polarisierte Städte. Soziale Ungleichheit als Herausforderung für die Stadtpolitik. Frankfurt: Campus.
31.
MagnaniLBertolottiT (2011) Cognitive bubbles and firewalls: Epistemic immunizations in human reasoning. Proceedings of the Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society33: 3370–3375.
32.
MöllerJHelbergerN (2018) Beyond the Filter Bubble: Concepts, Myths, Evidence, and Issues for Future Debates. Amsterdam: University of Amsterdam DARE.
33.
PariserE (2011) The Filter Bubble: What the Internet Is Hiding from You. London: Penguin.
34.
PhamTM, et al. (2020) The effect of social balance on social fragmentation. Journal of the Royal Society Interface. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2020.0752
35.
PitkinHF (1972) The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.
36.
PutnamRD (2020) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community (with a new preface and afterword by the author). New York: Simon & Schuster.
37.
RosaH (2017) Resonanzsphäre der Gesellschaft? Der Bildungs- und Demokratieauftrag des öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunks im digitalen Medienzeitalter. In: Der Auftrag: Bildung im Digitalen Zeitalter (Public Value Jahresstudie 2016/17), ed. ORF and BR, Vienna, pp. 6–33.
38.
RosaH (2019a) Resonance: A Sociology of Our Relationship to the World. Cambridge: Polity.
39.
RosaH (2019b) Demokratie und Gemeinwohl: Versuch einer resonanztheoretischen Neubestimmung. In: Was stimmt nicht mit der Demokratie? Eine Debatte mit Klaus Dörre, Nancy Fraser, Stephan Lessenich und Hartmut Rosa, ed. KettererHBeckerK. Berlin: Suhrkamp, pp. 160–188.
40.
RosaH (2020) The Uncontrollability of the World. Cambridge: Polity Press.
41.
SawardM (2010) The Representative Claim. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
42.
SunsteinSR (2017) #Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
43.
UraJDEllisCR (2008) Income, preferences, and the dynamics of policy responsiveness. Political Science and Politics41(4): 785–794.
44.
UrbinatiN (2019) Me the People: How Populism Transforms Democracy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
