PUBLIC SPHERE OF POLITICS: PHILOSOPHICAL CONNOTATIONS IN THE CONDITIONS OF DIGITAL SOCIETY
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18372/2412-2157.1.21266Keywords:
public sphere of politics, argumentative ability, digitalization, subjects of public communication, ethics of discourseAbstract
Introduction. The article examines the public sphere of politics under the conditions of the digitalization of contemporary society. The relevance of the study is determined by the growing influence of platform communication, viral and affective content, algorithmic mediation, and new forms of networked public and political participation on democratic publicity. The aim and tasks. The aim of the study is to clarify the content of the philosophical connotations of the public sphere of politics. The task is to reveal how political publicity and public argumentation change in digital communicative environments. Research methods. The methodological basis of the study combines phenomenological analysis, a dialectical approach, and elements of systemic analysis. These methods make it possible to consider the transition from classical forms of public discussion to platform-mediated political communication. Research results. It is shown that digital mass media transform the classical structural dimension of the public sphere and increasingly act as autonomous agents in the construction of meanings and hyperreality. The public sphere of politics is interpreted as a nonlinear networked space in which political discourse, communication, conceptualization, and argumentation interact under changing procedural conditions. Special attention is paid to the relationship between publicity and privacy in the era of data capitalism, as well as to the influence of algorithmic governance on democratic participation. Discussion. The results are discussed in relation to deliberative democratic theory, postmodern criticism of consensus, and the problem of fragmentation of public communication. It is emphasized that the digital public sphere is shaped by instability, competition for attention, and the tension between rational argumentation and affective mobilization. Conclusions. The article concludes that philosophical analysis of the public sphere of politics is increasingly important for understanding the transformation of democratic communication in digital society.
References
Список літератури
Beauvais E. The gender gap in political discussion group attendance. Politics & Gender. 2020. Vol. 16, No. 2. P. 1–24.
Claassen C. In the mood for democracy? Democratic support as thermostatic opinion. American Political Science Review. 2020. Vol. 114, No. 1. P. 36–53.
Correia J. C. Alternative Digital Platforms and the Renewal of the Public Sphere: Decidim and the Democratic Governance of Participatory Infrastructures. Social Sciences. 2026. Vol. 15, No. 3. P. 166. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci15030166
Doorenspleet R. Critical citizens, democratic support and satisfaction in African democracies. International Political Science Review. 2012. Vol. 33, No. 3. P. 279–300.
Goenaga A. Who cares about the public sphere? European Journal of Political Research. 2022. Vol. 61. P. 230–254. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12451
Habermas J. A New Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere and Deliberative Politics. Cambridge : Polity, 2022. URL: https://www.politybooks.com/bookdetail?book_slug=a-new-structural-transformation-of-the-public-sphere-and-deliberative-politics--9781509558933 (дата звернення: 24.02.2026).
Hasmath R. Discourse, Deliberation and Difference in an Authoritarian Public Sphere. Journal of Deliberative Democracy. 2023. Vol. 19, No. 1. DOI: https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.1182
Heitmayer M. The Second Wave of Attention Economics: Attention as a Universal Symbolic Currency on Social Media and beyond. Interacting with Computers. 2025. Vol. 37, No. 1. P. 18–29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwae035
Kalla J. L., Broockman D. E. Reducing exclusionary attitudes through interpersonal conversation: Evidence from three field experiments. American Political Science Review. 2020. Vol. 114, No. 2. P. 410–425.
Levasseur D. G., Carlin D. B. Egocentric Argument and the Public Sphere: Citizen Deliberations on Public Policy and Policymakers. Rhetoric and Public Affairs. 2001. Vol. 4, No. 3. P. 407–431. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41940589 (дата звернення: 24.02.2026).
Noy C. Moral discourse and argumentation in the public sphere: Museums and their visitors. Discourse, Context & Media. 2017. Vol. 16. P. 39–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016 /j.dcm.2017.01.005
Rainie L. The nine tribes of the internet. 2009. URL: http://www.slideshare.net/PewInternet/the-nine-tribes-of-the-internet-1555624 (дата звернення: 24.02.2026).
Shin B., Floch J., Rask M., Bæck P. A systematic analysis of digital tools for citizen participation. Government Information Quarterly. 2024. Vol. 41, No. 3. Article 101954. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2024.101954
Zenker F., van Laar J. A., Cepollaro B. et al. Norms of Public Argumentation and the Ideals of Correctness and Participation. Argumentation. 2024. Vol. 38. P. 7–40. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-023-09598-6
References
Beauvais, E. 2020. “The Gender Gap in Political Discussion Group Attendance.” Politics & Gender 16 (2): 1–24.
Claassen, C. 2020. “In the Mood for Democracy? Democratic Support as Thermostatic Opinion.” American Political Science Review 114 (1): 36–53.
Correia, J. C. 2026. “Alternative Digital Platforms and the Renewal of the Public Sphere: Decidim and the Democratic Governance of Participatory Infrastructures.” Social Sciences 15 (3): 166. https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci15030166.
Doorenspleet, R. 2012. “Critical Citizens, Democratic Support and Satisfaction in African Democracies.” International Political Science Review 33 (3): 279–300.
Goenaga, A. 2022. “Who Cares about the Public Sphere?” European Journal of Political Research 61: 230–254. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12451.
Habermas, Jürgen. 2022. A New Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere and Deliberative Politics. Cambridge: Polity.
Hasmath, R. 2023. “Discourse, Deliberation and Difference in an Authoritarian Public Sphere.” Journal of Deliberative Democracy 19 (1). https://doi.org/10.16997/jdd.1182.
Heitmayer, M. 2025. “The Second Wave of Attention Economics: Attention as a Universal Symbolic Currency on Social Media and beyond.” Interacting with Computers 37 (1): 18–29. https://doi.org/10.1093/iwc/iwae035.
Kalla, J. L., and D. E. Broockman. 2020. “Reducing Exclusionary Attitudes through Interpersonal Conversation: Evidence from Three Field Experiments.” American Political Science Review 114 (2): 410–425.
Levasseur, D. G., and D. B. Carlin. 2001. “Egocentric Argument and the Public Sphere: Citizen Deliberations on Public Policy and Policymakers.” Rhetoric and Public Affairs 4 (3): 407–431.
Noy, C. 2017. “Moral Discourse and Argumentation in the Public Sphere: Museums and Their Visitors.” Discourse, Context & Media 16: 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcm.2017.01.005.
Rainie, L. 2009. “The Nine Tribes of the Internet.” Accessed May 24, 2026. http://www.slideshare.net/PewInternet/ the-nine-tribes-of-the-internet-1555624.
Shin, B., J. Floch, M. Rask, and P. Bæck. 2024. “A Systematic Analysis of Digital Tools for Citizen Participation.” Government Information Quarterly 41 (3): 101954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2024.101954.
Zenker, F., J. A. van Laar, B. Cepollaro, et al. 2024. “Norms of Public Argumentation and the Ideals of Correctness and Participation.” Argumentation 38: 7–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-023-09598-6.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The scientific journal adheres to the principles of Open Access and provides free, immediate, and permanent access to all published materials without financial, technical, or legal barriers for readers.
All articles are published in Open Access under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license.
Copyright
Authors who publish their works in the journal:
-
retain the copyright to their publications;
-
grant the journal the right of first publication of the article;
-
agree to the distribution of their materials under the CC BY 4.0 license;
-
have the right to reuse, archive, and distribute their works (including in institutional and subject repositories), provided that proper reference is made to the original publication in the journal.
