THEORIES OF THE INFORMATION SOCIETY

Week One: Information and the Public

Habermas & Castells

Gina Lawrence & Tiffany Palioungas

Websters Introduction
In his introduction, Webster argues: On the one hand, there are those who subscribe to the notion that in recent times we have seen emerge information societies which are marked by their differences from hitherto existing societies [endorsers] On the other hand, there are scholars who, while happy to concede that information has taken on a special significance in the modern era, insist that the central feature of the present is its continuities with the past (6). Which of these perspectives do you subscribe to? What do you think are some of the key differences between these two positions on information society/ies?

Definitions of Information Society[ies]

Webster argues that there are 5 distinct definitions of information societies: Technological Economic Occupational Spatial Cultural

Technological Information Society

New technologies are one of the most visible indicators of new times, and accordingly are frequently taken to signal the coming of an information society The suggestion is, simply, that such a volume of technological innovations must lead to a reconstitution of the social world because the impact is so profound (9). This being so, can it be acceptable to take what is regarded as an asocial phenomenon (technology) and assert that this then defines the social world?

Habermas and the Proliferation of Information

With the growth of ICT and the information boom brought on by the internet, some theorists Suggest that the democratic process itself may be undermined owing to the inadequacies of the information made available to the public, since, if the citizenry is denied, or if it voluntarily spurns, reliable information, then how can the ideal of a thoughtful, deliberate and knowledgeable electorate be achieved? (161)

Information Proliferation Continued

What is the impact of information proliferation on our concept of democracy? Does it encourage participation or move us towards a more private world of saturated infotainment?

Information and Democracy

Do these forms of information and participation (public/private) make us more or less democratized? What sort of information is necessary for a democratic society?

The Public Sphere

[Habermas] argues that, chiefly in 18th and 19th century Britain, the spread of capitalism allowed the emergence of a public sphere that subsequently entered a decline in the mid to late twentieth century (163). Crucially, capitalist entrepreneurs were becoming affluent enough to struggle for and achieve independence from church and state (164) As capitalism grew and strengthened influence, so did its enthusiasts move from calls for reform of the established state towards a takeover of the state and use of it to further their own ends (165).

The Public Sphere Continued

To what extent does capitalism have a hold over societal relationships in an information society?

Information Management
Information management . . . Is fundamental to the administrative coherence of modern government. The reliance on communications and information has become paramount for governments in their attempts to manipulate public opinion and maintain social control (190). Does the growth of the information society expand or constrict the capabilities of the public sphere?

Objections
Is Habermas public sphere something that has ever truly existed, or, is it an unobtainable Utopia that will never be fully reached? Has the information society moved users towards participation in multiple public spheres?

Click to add text

Spatial Information Society

Here, the major emphasis is on information networks which connect locations and in consequence can have profound effects on the organization of time and space. It has become an especially popular index of the information society in recent years as information networks have become prominent features of social organization (17).

The Network Society

Castells argues that we are undergoing a transformation towards an information age, the chief characteristic of which is the spread of networks linking people, institutions and countries. There are many consequences of this, but the most telling is that the network society simultaneously heightens divisions while increasing integration of global affairs (101). How does Castells definition of the Network Society relate to and differ from Habermas concept of the (technological) Public Sphere?

Castells identifies instant wars as those fought in short decisive bursts by the powers that command the most advance technologies, and which are presented around the world in global To what extent do you media. (109)

Occupy and the Network Society

. . . Megacities . . . are development engines that are at once globally connected and locally disconnected, physically and socially (108).

think either of these excerpts apply to online activist movements, such as Occupy, Kony, The Tea Party, etc?

The Networked Corporation

Castells suggestion is that, even if transnational corporations continue to exist, they have been dramatically changed. Gone are the days of a global empire planned and operated by centralized command from the metropolitan center. In the information economy, the large corporation . . . Is not, and will no longer be self-contained and selfsufficient (104). Is it possible for a corporation to be successful without being a part of the networked society? Is this a new era of digital fordism (my own term, see104)? What are the advantages and disadvantages?

The Message or the Medium?

Recent trends [. . .] have developed cable and satellite television programs in ways that target audiences to receive a pre-selected diet of programs, dividing those who watch, for instance, Sky Sports from those drawn to MTVs rock channels. This is why Castells [. . .] refers to such things as the message is the medium, since what they transmit is dependent on the perceived requirements of segmented audiences (106). How does this differ from McLuhans assertion that the medium is the message? Do you side with Castells or McLuhan? Why?

Info-Tainment
Castells believes that inclusion on the network is a requisite of full participation in todays society. This is an argument for extending access to ICTs, especially to the Internet, as a right of citizenship in the information age. Despite his enthusiasm for connectivity, Castells is fearful that, if it is entertainment-led, it will result in people being interacted on by centralized forces rather than being truly interacting. (107) Does entertainment detract from the information society? Is this the downside of the network society? What are the overlaps and connections in Castells and Habermas ideas regarding info-tainment? What are the implications of these?

NEXT WEEK
Information and Labor/Class: Tizinia Tarranova Bell (Chapter 3) & Schiller (Chapter 6)