CURRAN AND THE PUBLIC SPHERE
Curran’s criticisms of Habermas public sphere centers on the role of the media in a democratic system as opposed to the traditional liberal epoch on which Habermas model was derived from. He states that the dynamics of the functions the media had evolved just as the modern state has evolved, thus traditionalist perspective on the democratic role of the media has become obsolete.
“how can this model -supposedly realized by a restricted class in the early nineteenth century- be universalized during the era of mass politics in a highly differentiated, organized capitalist society?” (Curran 1991: p. 82)
In discussing the ideal democratic media system for modern media, Curran discusses the traditional roles of the media and how they can be reformed using the key ideals of Habermas public sphere. We will first discuss these defunct roles of the media that is remised on the traditional liberal democracy in the modern capitalist democracy.
The Watchdog Role.
Curran identifies the traditional liberal argument on the primary democratic role of the government, which is the watchdog role. This role is the essence of democracy, the ability of the media to independently expose the excesses and abuse of the office of state authority. It argues that the media should not be subject to any form of regulation, that only when it is established on the free market can it be granted independence from the government, such that any form of regulation upon the media will cause it to lose its role as the watchdog overseeing the affairs of the state. This argument is the basis on which the deregulation of the media has been charted on, from the Royal Commissions in Britain to the right to free speech imparted in the 1974 Bill of Rights of the US First Amendment. However, he picks the inconsistency of this cause to be found effective only in the press media and not for broadcast media, this is evident as the broadcast media became flushed with the emergence of non-cable and satellite television. This signified the entry of private ownership into broadcast media and the deregulation of the public service broadcasting.
The emergence of free market media reduces the role of government surveillance to a minimal point. It is anchored on the free market capitalist interest, such that its functioning is characterized not with the democratic functioning of the state, but with the promotion of the capitalist organization of the media. Today, little attention is given to the government scrutiny as modern media is centered on entertainment.
The domino doesn’t end at the entry of private ownership of the media, as Curran notes, “the consequence of privatization is the attachment of large media enterprises to the core sectors of finance and industrial capital” (Curran, 1991). This is where we see the transformations of media ownership into conglomerates and media multinational capitalists, who exert dominant economic influence over the state. The relationship existing in this dynamic would create political partisanship and the protection of the interests of media capitalist in the free market by the state, who is supposed to be under surveillance by the media itself. Promotion of private interests increasing economic control, the capitalization of the media industry leading to a homogenous media, creating a stratified audience without diversity. This became the fate of the media in the capitalist democratic system.
The echoes of public broadcast media in the traditional liberal democracies do not so much differ as Curran explains. The public broadcast media, as opposed to the free market foundation of the private media, is benchmarked with the trust of its audience and long-term strategic interests, their reporters’ self-conception and self-respect, thus establishing its independence from the government. (Curran 1991: p.89). However, the legitimacy the public service broadcasting has accrued is based on the public support. This premise in the modern democratic state is largely threatened by government manipulations designed to minimalize the interference of the public service broadcasting. Thus, state-linked watchdogs can bark, while private watchdogs sleep. Yet, often, both can remain invincible. (Curran 1991: p.90)
The Informational Role
The traditional liberal democracy of the free market stresses the informational role of the media. Liberal democracy identifies that the free market is supposed to promote a philosophy of free-thinking capitalism in which no one is subjugated to the will of another but is able to express their individual thoughts openly to whomever they desire. We can thrust the backbone of the right to publish on this conception. The role of the media as a vehicle of information in the liberal democratic epoch was to inform the citizens with diversified views, accessible channels o communication between the government and the electorate, an area to freely discuss public opinion and achieve self-enlightenment. However, Curran as well as other critics argue that the characteristics of the free market media impairs its informational role.
Currans discussion on the concept of public sphere and the media sets out to promote radical discussions with inherent diversified views and thoughts that will cover both public affairs as well as entertainment.
According to Curran, the reform of the media as a vehicle of the public sphere can be idealized in his model of the democratic media. The modern media could be restructured as the guardian of the public sphere, a system empowering diverse groups with global information and ability to partake in informed rational debates on the matters of the state. The framework needed to achieve this would include minimal regulations, fairness legislations and the promotion of balanced representation of diverse groups in the media.
He designs the model with a central figure known as the core sector representing the representation of general interest with equal coverage of entertainment and public affairs. This is synonymous to the public service broadcasting sector, with its interest in fulfilling social objectives without risk of prioritizing one group over the other. A deregulated commercial system funded by public funds and operated with neutral hands to prevent politicization of its activities. The core sector is being fed sources from other branches of the democratic media system, however, to insulate it from the domination of one group over the others there would be a set mechanism to protect the core sector.
One of the sectors feeding the center of the democratic model system as proposed by Curran is the Civic media sector; it is the media targeted for all groups with the society, promoting the diversity of representation. This however in modern media is heavily threatened by tabloid journalism and entertainment media. Curran proposes the establishment of a public agency funded by advertising tax to promote civic media. This reform would ensure that relevant media content is not sidelined in this age of sponsored media content and advertising and can promote the interests of the civil society. Another is the Professional media sector; representing ethical journalism and promoting the watchdog role of the media. There’s also the Private Enterprise sector; the extravenous variable that challenges other sectors of the media system with its commercial interest of covering higher aggregate audience and Social market sector which will represent a complicated re-distributive system, finetuned over the years, and supports low circulation papers with a graduated subsidy.(Curran 1991)
Essentially, the democratic media system would represent the public sphere of the modern state, where the media would promote empowerment and self-actualization without recourse to economic gains, sustain the role of watchdog and government surveillance, and access to information that would allow consensus despite diversity of groups. With sectors of these ideal democratic media system recognized in the broadcasting system in several parts of Europe, it is still attainable wholly and at a universal level.
Omolara's Blog 