The public sphere transformation as a reflection of the individualization process

Individualization is the process of distancing and relief an individual from any form of collectivities: collective consciousness, traditions, traditional group membership — and obtaining own, specific, only inherent characteristics by individual. Individualization as a historical and sociological category has various forms of its manifestation. One of the aspects of the individualization process is the detraditionalization of life spheres and the emergence of new “spaces of freedom”, which give rise to new challenges for society and for the individual. The such a challenge for society is the drop of the social institutions importance as traditional guidelines for “life strategies and life situations”. There are so — called “phantom institutions” that keep their external form but stop performing their tasks and change their meaning.
The individualization process has affected all spheres of society, including the public sphere. In the sociological tradition, the theme of change and decline of the public sphere is devoted to the work of J. Dewey, J. Habermas, H. Arendt, R. Sennett, W. Lippmann, etc. Researchers say about the public sphere crisis in modern Western society. It is associated with the fusion of public and private life, the consideration of the public sphere through personal interests and its description in the categories of intimacy. People treat to public affairs too personally, which can be properly managed only with the impersonal, in terms of personal feelings. Society becomes important for the individual as a psychological system.
The purpose of this paper is to show the fall of the public sphere as a reflection of the individualization process. If initially the public space was formed under the impact of mass media, political and legal systems and state systems, in the XXI century the public sphere becomes a space of expression of individual freedom and independence through the blogosphere, video portals and social networks. It is necessary to revise the concept of the public sphere because of the global communication networks development and the development of digital technologies.

1. Arendt H. Vita activa, ili o deyatel’noj zhizni [Vita active or The Human Condition] / Pod red. D.M. Nosova. SPb., 2000 (in Russian).

2. Bek U. Obshchestva riska. Na puti k drugomu modern [Risk Society. On the way to another modernity]. M., 2000 (in Russian).

3. Benhabib S. The claims of culture: equality and diversity in the global era. Princeton, 2002.

4. Benkler Y. The wealth of networks: how social production transforms markets and freedom. New Haven, 2006.

5. Calhoun C. Introduction // Habermas and the Public Sphere / Ed. by C. Calhoun. Cambridge, 1992.

6. D’yui Dzh. Obshchestvo i ego problem [The society and its problems]. M., 2002 (in Russian).

7. Ehtling B., Aleksanyan K., Kelli Dzh., Faris R., Palfri Dzh., Gasser U. Publichnyj diskurs v rossijskoj blogosfere: analiz politiki i mobilizacii v Runete // Issledovaniya Centra Berkmana 2010. Okt. N 11. URL: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/sites/cyber. law.harvard.edu/files/Public_Discourse_in_the_Russian_Blogosphere RUSSIAN. pdf (accessed: 20.10.2013) (in Russian).

8. Foucault M. Technologies of self // Technologies of Self: Seminar with Michel Foucault. L., 1988. P. 16–49.

9. Foucault M. Govern mentality // The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmental rationality. Hemel Hempstead, 1991. P. 87–104.

10. Fraser N. et al. Transnationalizing the public sphere. Cambridge; Malden, 2014.

11. Giddens E.H. Uskol’zayushchij mir. Kak globalizaciya menyaet nashu zhizn’ [Runaway World: How Globalization is Reshaping Our Lives]. M., 2004 (in Russian).

12. Habermas Yu. Strukturnoe izmenenie publichnoj sfery. Issledovaniya otnositel’no kategorii burzhuaznogo obshchestva [The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere]. M., 2016 (in Russian).

13. Howe J. Big Boss is watching you. Yaho! // Internet Life. 2000. Oct. P. 105–107.

14. Kastel’s M. Galaktika Internet: razmyshleniya ob Internete, biznese i obshchestve [The Internet Galaxy, Reflections on the Internet, Business and Society] / Pod red. V. Haritonova. Ekaterinburg, 2004 (in Russian).

15. Kimelev Yu.A., Polyakova N.L. Modern i process individualizaciy: istoricheskie sud’by individa moderna. M., 2017 (in Russian).

16. Kimelev Yu.A., Polyakova N.L. Social’no-istoricheskij process individualizacii i social’nye mekhanizmy ego realizacii. Chast’ I. Differenciaciya i racionalizaciya. // Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta. Seriya 18. 2018. T. 24. N 1. S. 5–33 (in Russian).

17. Lash C. The culture of narcissism: American life in an age of diminishing expectations. L., 1980.

18. Lessing L. Code and other laws of cyberspace. N.Y., 1999.

19. Lipovetsky Zh. Era pustoty. Esse o sovremennom individualizme [Era of emptiness. Essays on contemporary individualism]. SPb., 2001 (in Russian).

20. Lippmann W. The Phantom public. N.Y., 1925.

21. Negt O., Kluge A. Öffentlichkeit und Erfahrung. Zur Organisations analys evon bürgerlicher und proletarischer Öffentlichkeit [in German]. Frankfurt a/M., 1972.

22. Popov A.V. Blogi: novaya sfera vliyaniya. M., 2008 (in Russian).

23. Rieff P. The triumph of the therapeutic: uses of faith after Freud. Chicago, 1978.

24. Rose N. The psychological complex: psychology, politics and society in England, 1969–1939. L., 1985.

25. Rose N. Governing the soul: the shaping of the private self. L., 1999.

26. Sennet R. Padenie publichnogo cheloveka [The Fall of public man]. M., 2002 (in Russian).

27. Sennet R. Plot’ i kamen’. Telo i gorod v zapadnoj civilizacii [The Corrosion of Character: The Personal Consequences of Work in the New Capitalism]. M., 2016 (in Russian).

28. Sirotkina I.E., Smit R. Psihologicheskoe obshchestvo i social’no-politicheskie peremeny v Rossii // Metodologiya i istoriya psihologii. 2008. 3. Vyp. 3. P. 73–90 (in Russian).

29. Smith R. The Norton history of the human sciences. N.Y., 1997.

30. Sunstein C.R. Republic.com 2.0. Princeton, 2007.

31. Wellman B. et al. The Social Affordances of the Internet for Networked Individualism // Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2003. April. Vol. 8. N 3. Young I.M. Inclusion and democracy. Oxford, 2000.

32. Yudin G.B. Recenziya na knigu: Habermas Yu. Strukturnaya transformaciya publichnoj sfery: Issledovaniya otnositel’no kategorii burzhuaznogo obshchestva (2016) // Filosofiya. Zhurnal Vysshej shkoly ehkonomiki. 2017. T. I. N 1. S. 123–133 (in Russian).