CONDITIONS OF ACCESSIBILITY OF SOCIAL MEDIA IN PUBLIC SPHERE
Keywords:
Public sphere, social media, digital public space, public debate, media transparencyAbstract
Social media are today an essential part of the public sphere. They are the main places where citizens come together to share information, to debate, to discuss, or to deliberate on common concerns. Social media plays an important role in the implementation of public debate. The analysis presented here allows us to conclude that currently, social media do not meet the conditions for the public sphere. Consequently, the realization of other rights is compromised. Social media require legislators to regulate them accordingly. States have positive obligations in the form of enabling their citizens to realize public debate. It is, therefore, necessary to launch an appropriate legislative process aimed at normalizing the activities of social media to guarantee these features. The state, acting to protect citizens' rights in the digital age, should establish regulations to guarantee the pluralism and autonomy of this new public sphere.
References
1. Kołodziejczyk Łukasz, Prywatność w Internecie: postawy i zachowania dotyczące nieujawniania danych prywatnych w mediach społecznych [Online privacy: attitudes and behaviors regarding non-disclosure of private data on social media]. (Publisher SBP 2014), 259–264. https://doi.org/10.14746/b.2014.18.15
2. Kopff Andrzej, Koncepcja prawa do intymności i do prywatności życia osobistego [The concept of the right to intimacy and privacy of personal life]. (Studia Cywilistyczne XX. Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe 1971)
3. Milczarek Ewa, Prywatność wirtualna: unijne standardy ochrony prawa do prywatności w Internecie [Virtual privacy: EU standards for protecting the right to privacy online], (C.H. Beck 2020)
4. Odugbemi Adeniyi, ‘Public opinion, the public sphere, and quality of governance: An exploration’, In Sina Odugbemi & Jacobson Thomas (Eds.), Governance reform under real-world conditions. Citizens, stakeholders, and voice, (The World Bank 2008), 15–37
5. Bentele Günter & Nothhaft Howard, ‘Strategic Communication and the Public Sphere from a European Perspective’ (2010) 4 International Journal of Strategic Communication 2, 93-116, https://doi.org/10.1080/15531181003701954
6. Cohen Joshua & Fung Archon, ‘Democracy and the digital public sphere’ In Lucy Bernholz, Héléne Landemore & Rob Reich (Eds.), Digital technology and democratic theory. (Chicago University Press 2021) 23–61
7. Jürgen Habermas, Between Facts and Norms. Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, (The MIT Press, 1996).
8. Reese-Schäfer Walter, ‘Communitarianism: political theory’, In Neil J. Smelser & Paul B. Baltes (Eds.). International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences. (Elsevier 2001) 4-2334.
9. Jürgen Habermas, Faktizität und Geltung: Beiträge zur Diskurstheorie des Rechts und des demokratischen Rechtsstaats [Factuality and validity: Contributions to the discourse theory of law and the democratic constitutional state]. (Suhrkamp 1992), 436
10. Habermas Jürgen, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, (Polity Press 1989).
11. Holub Rober C. & Habermas Jürgen, Critic in the Public Sphere, (Routledge 1991).
12. Brčić Kuljiš Marita, ‘Civil Society, Public Sphere, and Justice in the Philosophy of Iris Marion Young’ (2017) 32 Synthesis philosophica 1, 121-137, https://doi.org/10.21464/sp32109
13. Adut Ari, ‘A Theory of the Public Sphere’ (2012) 30 Sociological Theory 4, 238–262, https://doi.org/10.1177/0735275112467012
14. Habermas Jürgen, Between Facts and Norms. Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, (The MIT Press, 1996).
15. Habermas Jürgen, Der gespaltene Westen [The divided West]. (Suhrkamp 2004).
16. Kaplan Andreas M. & Haenlein Michael, ‘Users of the world, unite! The challenges and opportunities of Social Media’ (2010) 53 Business Horizons 1, 59-68 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2009.09.003
17. Gorodnichenko Yuriy, Pham Tho & Talavera Oleksandr, ‘Social media, sentiment and public opinions: Evidence from #Brexit and #USElection’ (2023) European Economic Review 136, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.euroecorev.2021.103772
18. Kulesza Joanna, ‘Wykładnia znamienia "miejsca publicznego" na przykładzie wybranych wykroczeń’ [Interpretation of the sign of "public place" on the example of selected offenses], (2022) Państwo i Prawo 6, 66-78.
19. Nawrocki Mariusz, ‘Internet jako miejsce publiczne. Glosa do postanowienia SN z dnia 17 kwietnia 2018 r., IV KK 296/17’ [The Internet as a public place. Comment on the decision of the Supreme Court of April 17, 2018, IV KK 296/17], (2019) Orzecznictwo Sądów Polskich 2.
20. Kalay Yehuda & Marx John, ‘Changing the Metaphor: Cyberspace as a Place’ (2003) Proceedings of CAAD Futures 31.
21. Główczyński Maciej, ‘Human–place–technology relations in the digital placemaking process’ (2024) Geoforum 149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2024.103950
22. Habermas Jürgen, ‘Reflections and Hypotheses on a Further Structural Transformation of the Political Public Sphere’ (2022) 39 Theory, Culture & Society 4, 145-171. https://doi.org/10.1177/02632764221112341
23. Sunday Times v Great Britain, Application no 6538/74 (European Court of Human Rights April 4, 1979).
24. Rasmussen Terje, Internet and the Political Public Sphere, (2014) 8 Sociology Compass 12, 1315-1329;
25. Ilbasmiş Violeta Stratan, ‘A Theoretical Approach To The Public Space Concept Evolution: From Habermas To Internet, Big Data And Social Media’ (2022) 12 New media and social communication 3, 180-186;
26. Camp Jean & Chien Yang-Ting., ‘The internet as public space: concepts, issues, and implications in public policy’ (2000) 30 ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society 3, 13-19.
27. Geiger, R. Stuart ‘Does Habermas Understand the Internet? The Algorithmic Construction of the Blogo/Public Sphere’ (2009) 10 A Journal of Communication, Culture, and Technology 1.
28. Rasmussen Terje, Internet and the Political Public Sphere, (2014) 8 Sociology Compass 12, 1315-1329;
29. Milczarek Ewa, ‘Ograniczanie czy obrona wolności słowa? Rozważania na temat koncepcji regulacji dotyczącej działalności mediów społecznościowych’ [Restricting or defending freedom of speech? Considerations on the concept of regulation regarding social media activities] (2022) 3 Przegląd Sejmowy 170, 121–142; https://doi.org/10.31268/PS.2022.114
30. Benkler Jochaj, The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom (Yale University Press, 2006).
31. Castells Manuel, Communication Power, (Oxford University Press 2009)
32. Young Iris M. Justice and the Politics of Difference, (Princeton University Press 1990)
33. Bruns Axel & Highfield Tim, ‘Is Habermas on Twitter? Social media and the public sphere’ In. Gunn Enli, Axel Bruns., Anders O. Larsson, Eli Skogerbo & Christian Christensen, The Routledge companion to social media and politics (Routledge 2015). 56-73;
34. Cela Erlis, ‘Social Media as a New Form of Public Sphere’ (2015) 4 European Journal of Social Sciences Education and Research 1.
35. Camp Jean & Chien Yang-Ting., ‘The internet as public space: concepts, issues, and implications in public policy’ (2000) 30 ACM SIGCAS Computers and Society 3, 13-19.
36. Ochman Andrzej, ‘Medialna sfera publiczna według Jürgena Habermasa’ [Media public sphere according to Jürgen Habermas], (2015) Studia Paradyskie 25.
37. Habermas Jürgen, ‘Reflections and Hypotheses on a Further Structural Transformation of the Political Public Sphere’ (2022) 39 Theory, Culture & Society 4, 145-171. https://doi.org/10.1177/02632764221112341
38. Gillespie Tarleton, ‘Can an Algorithm be Wrong?’ (2012) 1 Limn 2.
39. Bygrave Lee A.. Internet Governance by Contract, (Oxford Academic 2015)
40. Hooker Matthew P., ‘Censorship, Free Speech & Facebook: Applying the First Amendment to Social Media Platforms via the Public Function Exception’ (2019) 15 Washington Journal of Law, Technology & Arts 1.
41. Balkin Jack M., ‘Free speech is a triangle’ (2011) 118 Columbia Law Review 7.
42. Cohen Joshua & Fung Archon, ‘Democracy and the digital public sphere’ In Lucy Bernholz, Héléne Landemore & Rob Reich (Eds.), Digital technology and democratic theory. (Chicago University Press 2021) 23–61
43. Milczarek Ewa, ‘The Filter Bubble: How to Control Democracy in the Information Society Era’ (2023) Challenges of the Future 8 https://doi.org/10.37886/ip.2023.001
44. Bruns Alex, ‘Filter buble’ (2019) 8 Internet Policy Review 4, https://doi.org/10.14763/2019.4.142
45. Milczarek Ewa, ‘Ograniczanie czy obrona wolności słowa? Rozważania na temat koncepcji regulacji dotyczącej działalności mediów społecznościowych’ [Restricting or defending freedom of speech? Considerations on the concept of regulation regarding social media activities] (2022) 3 Przegląd Sejmowy 170, 121–142; https://doi.org/10.31268/PS.2022.114
46. Chambers Simone, ‘Deliberative democracy and the digital public sphere: Asymmetrical fragmentation as a political not a technological problem’ (2023) 30 Constellations 1 https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8675.12662
47. Brol Marcin & Czetwertyński Sławomir, ‘Sieciowa sfera publiczna a media społecznościowe’ [Online public sphere and social media] (2015) Studia Ekonomiczne 209.
48. Fuchs Christian, ‘Social Media and the Public Sphere’ (2014) 12 tripleC 1 https://doi.org/10.31269/triplec.v12i1.552
49. Barber Benjamin R., ‘Which Technology and Which Democracy?’ In Henry Jenkins & David Thorburn (eds), Democracy and the new media (The MIT Press 2003)
50. Skwarav Bartosz, ‘W obronie bezpośredniego horyzontalnego obowiązywania praw człowieka’ [In defense of the direct horizontal validity of human rights], (2017) 1 Przegląd Sejmowy 138.
51. Wróblewska Iwona, ‘Poziome działanie praw jednostki jako rozwiązanie ustrojowe’ [Horizontal operation of individual rights as a political solution], (2014) Przegląd Prawa Konstytucyjnego 1 https://doi.org/10.15804/ppk.2014.01.03
