Habermas's Utopian Pipedream

Although reading Frank Webster’s Theories of the Information Society helped me to better understand Jurgen Habermas’s The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, it did little to alter my opinion that Habermas’s concept of a “public sphere” not only never truly existed, but could, in fact, never exist because the politics of information are, and have always been, inextricably intertwined with that of power. Even today, it is those in power who not only determine what “information” is relevant, but with the media of the world in fewer and fewer hands, what is actually disseminated as news or information around the world. Thus, even as an American woman living in the 21st century, who it would seem is no longer disenfranchised from Habermas’s “public sphere,” and has a plethora of information readily available to me, the reality is that ready access to the ever increasing “quantity” of information available does not necessarily correlate to the availability of “quality” information (Webster 21-3). Moreover, Habermas's theory does not address the fact that there are many members of society who are still disenfranchised from accessing, much less participating in, his “public sphere.” And though admittedly here in the U.S. it would seem more likely to be an exclusion based on economic issues rather than that of class, gender, culture etc… that cannot be said of the world in general. Therefore, as it is highly unlikely that we will ever live in a world where equal access to information that is untainted by power is available to all, the public sphere as conceived by Habermas will remain a utopian pipedream.