Download to read offline
Uploaded byAxel Bruns
From “the” Public Sphere to a Network of Publics: Rethinking Contemporary Public Communication Spaces
Keynote presented at the symposium "Perspectives on Public Spheres and the Network of Publics", Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte, 6 Oct. 2025.
More Related Content
Similar to From “the” Public Sphere to a Network of Publics: Rethinking Contemporary Public Communication Spaces
More from Axel Bruns
From “the” Public Sphere to a Network of Publics: Rethinking Contemporary Public Communication Spaces
- 1. CRICOS No.00213J From “the”Public Sphere to a Network of Publics: Rethinking Contemporary Public Communication Spaces Axel Bruns Australian Laureate Fellow Digital Media Research Centre Queensland University of Technology Brisbane, Australia a.bruns@qut.edu.au Bluesky: @snurb.info | Mastodon: @snurb@aoir.social | Xitter: @snurb_dot_info
- 2.
- 3. CRICOS No.00213J The PublicSphere?
- 4. CRICOS No.00213J • “Mediatedpolitical communication” • “Carried on by an elite” • “On a virtual stage of mediated communication” (Habermas, 2006) Public Sphere Photo by Mike Philipp on Unsplash
- 5.
- 6. CRICOS No.00213J https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1412688.1412691 (Image: Julien Beauséjour) ‘The’ PublicSphere, Today? Mainstream media Niche media Publics, communities, … Everyday communication ‘Wild Flows’
- 7.
- 8. CRICOS No.00213J • Publics,Crowds, … • Triggered by issues and events • Fast-moving and short-lived • Limited in focus and scope • Public Spherules (incl. Groups, Communities) • Defined by topics and themes • More persistent and stable • Broader scope but unified by common theme • Public Spheres? • Domain-, identity-, platform-specific • E.g. political, Indigenous, Twittersphere • Persistent and highly visible • Encompassing relevant publics and spherules • ‘The’ Public Sphere? • Traditionally, an arena for public debate amongst elites in front of mass media audiences • Now, the sum total of smaller publics, spherules, and spheres? Digital Publics and ‘the’ Public Sphere
- 9. CRICOS No.00213J ‘The’ PublicSphere? • No, but subsets: • ‘The’ public sphere • Public spheres – e.g. political, cultural, Indigenous, … / blogosphere, Twittersphere, … • Public spherules / sphericules – e.g. on various larger themes • Issue publics – e.g. on specific issues, events, topics • Personal publics – around individuals, e.g. around social media profiles • … but maybe not quite so hierarchical https://www.rawpixel.com/image/6536163/vector-sticker-public-domain-blue
- 10.
- 11. CRICOS No.00213J • Smallnumber, known to each other • Shared interests, values, and aims • Stable relationships and distinct roles Groups Photo by Saksham Gangwar on UnSplash
- 12. CRICOS No.00213J • Smallnumber, known to each other • Shared interests, values, and aims • Stable relationships and distinct roles Groups How and Where to Find Them • Strong, repeated, stable interconnections / interactions • Shared language, identity markers, media objects • Similar activity patterns
- 13. CRICOS No.00213J • Larger,key members known to each other • Shared but contestable interests, values, and aims • More complex structure involving centre and periphery, leaders and followers Communities Photo by Jacinto Diego on Unsplash
- 14. CRICOS No.00213J • Larger,key members known to each other • Shared but contestable interests, values, and aims • More complex structure involving centre and periphery, leaders and followers Communities How and Where to Find Them • Repeated, stable interconnections / interactions • Emergence of influential lead participants • Centre / periphery distinctions (e.g. 1/9/90, Pareto: creators, contributors, lurkers) • More interactions within community than outside it (e.g. E-I Index) • Broadly shared language, identity markers, media objects
- 15. CRICOS No.00213J • Muchlarger and much less knowable • Transient and temporarily gathered in one space (online or offline) • Some shared identity or interests but no universally shared values Crowd Photo by Joseph Chan on Unsplash
- 16. CRICOS No.00213J • Muchlarger and much less knowable • Transient and temporarily gathered in one space (online or offline) • Some shared identity or interests but no universally shared values Crowd How and Where to Find Them • Large to very large number of participants • Strong activity for limited period of time, or around defined issues • Similar activity patterns, but limited interaction between participants • Shared language, identity markers, media objects relating to specific driving issue
- 17. CRICOS No.00213J • Centredaround shared interest, issue, text • Capable of forming and dissolving rapidly (e.g. ad hoc publics, issue publics, …) • Aware of each other and able to communicate publicly • May develop shared values through their communication • Capable of organising in support of a common goal Public Photo by Colin Lloyd on Unsplash
- 18. CRICOS No.00213J • Centredaround shared interest, issue, text • Capable of forming and dissolving rapidly (e.g. ad hoc publics, issue publics, …) • Aware of each other and able to communicate publicly • May develop shared values through their communication • Capable of organising in support of a common goal Public How and Where to Find Them • Large to very large number of participants • Strong activity for limited period of time, or around defined issues • Similar activity patterns, and greater levels of interaction between participants • Shared language, identity markers, media objects relating to specific driving issue • Centring around key values can produce longer-term structures and leadership
- 19. CRICOS No.00213J • Centredaround a shared (media) text • Large but dispersed and usually unknown to each other • Unlikely to share values beyond central common interest • Incapable of acting together Audience Photo by Ben Tofan on Unsplash
- 20. CRICOS No.00213J • Centredaround a shared (media) text • Large but dispersed and usually unknown to each other • Unlikely to share values beyond central common interest • Incapable of acting together Audience How and Where to Find Them • Unified by central text (live performance, media object, event / issue hashtag, …) • Participant numbers from niche to very large • Observing rather than actively contributing • Therefore invisible to and unaware of each other • Often imagined and assumed rather than tangibly traceable
- 21. CRICOS No.00213J a beautifulphotorealistic painting of the public sphere (via Midjourney) an extremely complex 3d topographic model of the networked public sphere (via Midjourney) Why Do We Care? • Metaphors matter: • Making complex intangible concepts intelligible • Providing a common language for analysis • Enabling better diagnosis of issues and problems • Informing practical action, business strategies, and policy-making • If there is no one public sphere any more, how do we ensure every citizen is well-informed about what is happening in the world, and able to exercise their democratic rights and obligations?
- 22.
- 23. CRICOS No.00213J ‘Good’ and‘Bad’ Publics • Forms of publics: • Publics (Warner, 2002) • Hegemonic publics • Subaltern counterpublics (Fraser, 1990) • Issue publics (Habermas, 2006) • Ad hoc publics (Bruns & Burgess, 2011) • Parasitic publics (Larson & McHendry Jr., 2019) • Phantasmagoric publics (Badola, forthcoming) • Affective publics (Papacharissi, 2014) • … Image: Midjourney
- 24. CRICOS No.00213J Ready accessto information enables spread of ‘fake news’, hyperpartisanship, and polarisation. (But also social connection and community support.) Hyperpartisans, Hyperconnected (https://twitter.com/bigfudge212121/status/1259317174776115201)
- 25.
- 26.
- 27.
- 28. CRICOS No.00213J Forms ofPolarisation • Polarisation at what level? • Issue-based: disagreements over specific policy settings • Ideological: fundamental differences based on political belief systems • Affective: political beliefs turned into deeply felt in-group / out-group identity • Perceived: view of society, as based on personal views and media reporting • Interpretive: reading of issues, events, and media coverage based on personal views • Interactional: manifested in choices to interact with or ignore other individuals/groups • (and more…)
- 29. CRICOS No.00213J Agonism? Polarisation?Dysfunction? • How bad is it, exactly? • All politics is polarised (just not to the point of dysfunction) • Much (most?) politics is multipolar, not just left/right • When does mild antagonism turn into destructive polarisation? • We suggest five symptoms (Esau et al., 2024): a) breakdown of communication; b) discrediting and dismissing of information; c) erasure of complexities; d) exacerbated attention and space for extreme voices; e) exclusion through emotions. Image: Midjourney
- 30. CRICOS No.00213J Mapping Publics •Network analysis of ‘the’ public sphere: • Internal structures, external relations • Flows of information and attention • Clusters and disconnections • Discursive alliances and antagonisms • Practice mapping as a framework: • From direct interactions … • … to similarities in practices • (more on this tomorrow!)
- 31. CRICOS No.00213J If weidentify these symptoms: what can we do about them?
- 32. CRICOS No.00213J Thank you Image:Midjourney
- 33. CRICOS No.00213J This researchis supported by the Australian Research Council through the Australian Laureate Fellowship project Determining the Dynamics of Partisanship and Polarisation in Online Public Debate. Acknowledgments