Tanni Haas: Question 4

The Internet seems to be a medium that privileges the formation of communities of interest. How are these similar to and different from geographic communities? Will this difference shape the kinds of public problems on which these communities (with the assistance of journalists) might work?

While I realize that the distinction between “communities of interest” and “geographic communities” is a common one, I find this distinction misleading, even suspect. Indeed, I would argue that, even in the smallest of localities, you will find social groups with unequal degrees of political power. In this sense, I would prefer to dispense with the notion of “community” altogether, under the assumption that there are no substantive values which unite given localities, but rather that various social groups within those localities have different, and often conflicting, political interests. A much more accurate and productive way of describing given localities would be to distinguish between different “publics” whose interests might conflict but could be mediated through adherence to the procedural, but not substantive, value of rational-critical deliberation. To return to my answer to a previous question, the challenge for journalists would be to acknowledge those divisions among citizens, and then to try to facilitate the kinds of online interactions that would allow all citizens, whether politically powerful or not, to voice their particular concerns – and to hear each other out. Indeed, one of the great sins of mainstream journalism continues to be the glossing over of political conflicts of interest under the assumption that we live in a classless society characterized by common values.