Tanni Haas: Question 5

Can an online conversation produce a discussion that looks anything like a Habermasian deliberation? If not, what would journalists have to do to prompt such an online conversation in their local communities?

I certainly think it would be possible for journalists to facilitate online discussions that resemble the ideals of Habermasian deliberation. However, it would require journalists to be much more mindful than they currently appear to be of what they are trying to accomplish and to take a much more active role in moderating those discussions. Most importantly, journalists would need to ensure that as wide a spectrum of citizens as possible is included in given discussions. This might require journalists to offer citizens various incentives to participate, especially to those who rarely participate in such discussions, whether in the form of financial remuneration or a promise to make use of their input in subsequent coverage. Second, journalists would need to ensure that all citizens have an equal opportunity to participate in those discussions, including by curtailing the contributions of those who tend to dominate the discussions and encouraging those who are silent to speak up as much as possible. Finally, journalists would need to encourage citizens to not only state their views clearly and comprehensively – and genuinely listen to those of others – but also to state their reasons for espousing certain views. Indeed, without extensive and reciprocal reason-giving, citizens could not be said to engage in rational-critical deliberation in the Habermasian sense of the term.