Enzensberger and Habermas

Despite their Marxist orientation, both Enzensberger and Habermas are generally considered more optimistic about the emancipatory potential of modern culture. What is the reason for this optimism?

Enzensberger’s optimism about the freeing potential of modern culture is in his belief that “For the first time in history, the media are making possible mass participation in a social and socialized productive process, the practical means of which are in the hands of the masses themselves” (97). He is hopeful that a new system of interaction between media and the public will emerge, and advocates for media that allows the audience a chance to respond. He finds that “the new media are egalitarian in structure,” and therefore, “Anyone can take part in them” (Enzensberger 105). The media today focuses on present affairs, and influences what is deemed historical or influential in modern times by the stories that they choose to cover. New forms of media such as the website YouTube, allow practically anyone (given they have a computer and a camera) the opportunity to become their own kind of famous, and make their own kind of history. The internet has blossomed in contemporary times, and mass communication has expanded, reaching a new potential of influence by “mak[ing] everyone a manipulator” (Enzensberger 104). Although Enzensberger was writing before the internet was the power it is today, it is clear to see his optimism about the future that has come to be the present.

Habermas could also be seen as optimistic for his outlook on the importance of the public sphere in creating changes in society. As the class structures broke down to allow for conversation between the high and low cultures, a public was born that shared common interests in the welfare of themselves and their society. A kind of equality was born with the creation of the public sphere that had not been seen before. Coffeehouses encouraged talks concerning social, political and cultural issues between classes, and “The issues discussed became ‘general’ not merely in their significance, but also in their accessibility: everyone had to be able to participate” (Habermas 37). The development of the public sphere created an atmosphere of debate and critique in which everyone could participate. This interest in participation and sharing of opinions has only grown in the centuries after the emergence of the public sphere.

Works Cited

Enzensberger, Hans Magnus., and Michael Roloff. "Constituents of a Theory of the Media." The Consciousness Industry; on Literature, Politics and the Media. New York: Seabury, 1974. 95-128. Print.

Habermas, Jurgen. "Social Structures of the Public Sphere." The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: an Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge, MA: MIT, 1989. 27-43. Print.