SESSION 1 START: 19/02/2009 16:20 END: 19/02/2009 19:05

PARTECIPANTS

Instructors
Fine Gary A.
Segre Sandro

Students
Domenico Sivilli
Everhart Katherine
Treré Emiliano
Savini Federico

Moderator
Torrisi Giovanni

Guests
Freschi Anna Carola
Yuri Kazepov

 

To mantain the "live" and international feel of our "Meet the author" sessions, the trascription has not been edited except for typos and repetitions.

[Torrisi Giovanni] Good afternoon and welcome to this meeting with the authors. Today we will be speaking with Sandro Segre and Gary A. Fine about “Politics in the Public Sphere. The Power of Tiny Publics in Classical Sociology”.

[Fine Gary A.] Hello. This is Gary Fine. Sorry I'm late.

[Torrisi Giovanni] No problem. Thanks to be with us today.

[Fine Gary A.] It took a little longer than the test last week to get on.

[Fine Gary A.] How long is the discussion likely to be?

[Torrisi Giovanni] I am confident that few other people are going to join.. I propose to wait some more minutes before beginning...

[Fine Gary A.] Ok

[Torrisi Giovanni] In the meanwhile if the people already attending would like to post some questions, they can do so just pressing "question" on top of the central windows and typing their question in it... the questions will be pending and I will be able to send them on the "lesson" windows as soon as it is needed.

[Question from Everhart Katherine] This is less a question about the paper for the moment, but I was wondering if it might be possible to get a quick introduction from everyone. I'm curious about where everyone is located and areas of interest. Is this possible?

[Torrisi Giovanni] I agree with Katherine Everhart’s proposal. We can do it now (while we wait) and with the "question" modality. Please Katherine, you begin.while we prepare our presentation as well.

[Everhart Katherine] Great. I'm currently a graduate student at Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee. I'm in my first year here, though I have already obtained a MA in sociology from UNC-Charlotte in Charlotte, North Carolina. My areas of interest are culture, in particular artistic workers. Looking forward to discussing with all of you.

[Fine Gary A.] Katherine, How did you find out about this website and this discussion forum?

[Everhart Katherine] I received an email from the ASA culture section and it seemed like an excellent opportunity to engage in a more international community.

[Fine Gary A.] Ahh, very good.

[Question from Savini Federico] My name is Federico Savini and currently I am in Paris for part of my MA thesis. I am enrolled in the Research MA in Metropolitan studies at the University of Amsterdam. I am a bachelor in Sociology and a MA in Comparative Urban studies. My works deal with governance in urban development projects. What I try to do is to evaluate legitimacy, efficiency and innovation in governing urban projects.

[Question from Freschi Anna Carola] Good afternoon everybody and thank you for this opportunity. I am an Assistant Professor at the University of Bergamo. I am currently working on electronic democracy, deliberative democracy, digital cultures and information society. I find very interesting this experimentation of interaction with the authors.

[Segre Sandro] Hello, I'm Sandro, co-author of the article. I'm glad to participate to the discussion.

[Question from Treré Emiliano] Hello everyone, I am a PhD student in Multimedia Communication (2nd year) based at University of Udine, Italy. My research interests include: Social Movements & ICTs and Social networking. I am currently investigating for my dissertation the use of ICTs by the Italian student movement against the Gelmini law.

[Fine Gary A.] And I'm Gary, another author. Anna, I had a lovely visit to Bergamo with Marco Santoro last April.

[Question from Torrisi Giovanni] I am legal sociologist interested in online participative democratic processes. I have a pH.D and I am actually working on the concept of "blended democracy", which is a "variant" of e-democracy. I think that the discussion that the authors you put forward about deliberation and public opinion in tiny politics can be of use for the concept.

[Torrisi Giovanni] I am happy to see that everybody seems to have grasped perfectly the way in which it is possible to interact in this platform...I should note that in contrast to most of you, I am much less comfortable with this kind of communication, but since my younger son will only communicate with IM's I am learning.

[Torrisi Giovanni] Thus, I think that we can begin the dances with a question that seems to be "in the air"...Let's go with the first question for the authors, that, I was writing, was somehow "in the air"... Do you see any relationship between these new forms of online interactions (im's, blogs, etc.) and tiny politics? Can it change the way in which the message (and knowledge, and power) is conceived and trasmitted?

[Question from Everhart Katherine] Yes. I agree Giovanni. One of my questions was in regard to having the authors speak more about the influence of technology on this meso-level of analysis. In particular I'm thinking of how regarding the increasing fragmentation of society- increasing difference and fragmentation of small groups- how e-groups (chat rooms, social networking sites) may be similar or different than what we typically think of as small groups in civil society (town hall meetings, etc.). Please keep in mind these are not my focus areas, so I may be asking a question that is obvious...

[Segre Sandro] I think Gary is most qualified to answer this question.

[Fine Gary A.] Hmm. There is a phenomenology of communication - and this is connected to generational experience. I know that I will never find IM communication to be fully transparent and "natural", although as mentioned this is how my son operates. I will be able to "do" it, just like my father was able to learn to use computers, but he never felt comfortable. Anna, I have a PM from you which probably should be on our main discussion line. Do you want to add it?

[Question from Freschi Anna Carola] In your article you underline the role of tiny publics for democracy. What do you think about the institutional growing adoption of deliberative techniques based on the "artificial" groups of citizens (selected random sampling), like those attending electronic town meetings, citizens juries and so on?

[Fine Gary A.] Again generational comfort is at issue here. I imagine that as this form of discourse becomes more common and the rules, norms and expectations are developed, it will be more common and more accepted. The idea of seeing something seems central to me, but as Menchik mentions in the recent AJS there are ways that paraverbal communication occurs in online communication. It was a very interesting article. I should note to give credit that Menchik had a co-author as well, whose name I don't have access to.

[Fine Gary A.] But of course these forms of communication are part of the change from a locality based structure to an affinity based structure. Daniel Menchik and X. Tian. 2008. "Putting Social Context into Text" American Journal of Sociology 114, 332-70.

[Segre Sandro] I feel classical authors might contribute an answer to such questions only indirectly, with their focus on the causal relation between the strength of civil society, and the discussion of public affairs in small groups.

[Fine Gary A.] Couldn't have done that a decade ago, but I just google Menchik and AJS and there it was But also through their recognition of social change. Did Weber or Durkheim write about automobiles? I know that there was some literature on the effect of cars by the 1920s/1930s.

[Segre Sandro] They wrote about encounters, one way or the other. Techniques are only instrumental.

[Fine Gary A.] Cars (and public transportation) changed the ability of people to make connections. But techniques, such as the internet are not only instrumental, but they become moral. Such as who has the right to communicate with whom? Techniques start as technical matters, but they become seen as the basis of how a social system should properly operate.

[Segre Sandro] The Chicago School was interested in the impact of technology on communication, writing all of them under the influence of Simmel

[Fine Gary A.] And they change the social structure. Simmel would certainly have had insight on this.

[Everhart Katherine] Or perhaps even having access to these technologies, from a class perspective.

[Fine Gary A.] Exactly, and we have seen how the digital divide has shifted. Consider all of those Nigerian emails. Now there is still a digital divide, but the lines are becoming blurred, like cars, radio, television before them.

[Torrisi Giovanni] I profoundly disagree with Sandro Segre. techniques are NOT only instrumental. They, for instance, allow people to intervene in the public arena as they could not do before, changing in this the way balances of power. but please go on. When you finish the phrase, please write "@." to make us understand that you finished your intervention. @.

[Fine Gary A.] Ah, socialization at work@

[Torrisi Giovanni] Ok. thanks a lot. I will now give the floor to a very long question from Federico Savini.

[Question from Savini Federico] I have been very interested in what you sed about the end of the article. That " the challenge for democratic states is to encourage a kind of super-ordinate affiliation to the larger political system". I think you are right ideed. this is a big priority in the political practice and rhetoric. However I have tried to understand how to create that type of integration :). To continue the debate: is e-democracy a tool for "acting" on tiny publics and create the conditions for that "affiliation" (poltical education etc...). Or, as we might argue, the "existence" of an affiliate tiny-public is the "pre-condition" for an effective use of those technologies? Probably, both I guess...what do you think about this?

[Fine Gary A.] But at the same time, these technologies are in dynamic change as more people get access over time@
Federico, a very interesting question. The question is which comes first the group or the virtual group.

[Segre Sandro] The Durkheimian concept of"moral density" is crucial in this connection. Techniques are instrumental in the sense that their effects are relevant, not the specific tecnique which happens to have been used.

[Fine Gary A.] Because virtual groups do often (still) desire material groups behind them. But how can virtual groups be started. Can they be started without physical groups? Moral density is a central concept, and it is important to see how it can be played out in these settings.@ But, Sandro, it seems that the specific techniques can be made moral. Thus, the various debates over the propriety of cell phone use - in public settings and in cars. I'm enjoying the service message discussion, which seems very relevant to the core issues of the larger discussion. I like the phrase of "instant chat room philosophy." So what does it mean to say that a technical forum such as a chatroom have a philosophy? And am I violating. What constitutes a "long intervention"? Especially for someone who normally speaks in chunks of five minutes or so?@And should I type everything at once (long gaps) or do shorter messages? Given that I don't know what you are up to? Your responses (all of you) just appear when they appear, but I have no sense (unlike FTF communication) when you are about to intervene.@ Does online communication privilege writers over talkers?

[Segre Sandro] So, a basic question may concern what is the impact of new technologies on civil society small groups, opportunities of interactions, and the strength of democratic institutions. Habermas, among contemporary authors, has developed this theme@.

[Fine Gary A.] Does this forum privilege those with a certain sort of writerly fluency, or does it degenerate thoughtful writing@ Right, Sandro. Who gains, who loses in the process. It seems to be more communication, but of what kind?

[Everhart Katherine] I think this is an interesting question. For me, I feel more free in asking questions and engaging in a discussion than in physical space discussions. This may have to do with being a graduate student though!@

[Fine Gary A.] OK, so the question is why? Is there less social cost by having the absence of the visual? Or is it that the informality and the immediacy of online talk protect you from evaluation? Or something else?@

[Torrisi Giovanni] Moreover, internet is (has?) not just one "philosophical system". relating a chat room with a skype communication or with a blog, is like comparing a car with an airplane, as they are both system of transportation... I think online chats have the advantage and disadvantage to privilege "just-in-time" options. Answering a question online in a synchronous chat is quite different from a Forum or a lesson. You don't have time to think and what you say (sorry "write") is what just comes out "spontaneously"....

[Everhart Katherine] I think less social cost is involved- in that I am unable to see the expressions- so evaluation, indeed. Also, I think I may be able to formulate my questions and thoughts more fully in this type of forum than in person.

[Fine Gary A.] To GT, and we are still at the start of the process in which there are all kinds of products competing. To Yuri, and because just in time communication is so rapid, it de-privileges deep, complex thought, not to mention spelling@ And it permits us to multi-task while pretending to be focused.@

[Kazepov Yuri] Only students or participants can multi-task, not you... :-) at least in such a context.

[Fine Gary A.] Of course.@ ;-) Katherine raises an interesting point - which touches on the relation of the visual to a sense of identity.

[Everhart Katherine] And also a connection with status characteristics, perhaps?

[Fine Gary A.] Federico, how does this then make online communication (or the different forms) different. But, Katherine, but does online communication make status characteristics more or less relevant, since all I know about you is gender and a very few other biographical things, but not all the information that would otherwise be known through FTF communication.@

[Savini Federico] I think that the difference doesn't stands in the "online" indeed. I think that the "online" indicates the fact that we are using ICTs...

[Fine Gary A.] And here is another issue, perhaps directed to Giovanna. This is the first time I have done this, and as a result I have no idea whether our discussion has been like any other discussion you have previously had. I write in a state of ignorance - and if others are like me - it is a state of pluralistic ignorance, following David Matza. We are making up norms on the fly - except for at the end the “@”.@

[Savini Federico] But if we want to understand the "power balances" in the communication....we should before get the "type of communication" (of course the technology define the type, but it is also true that the technology is used, promoted, selected to use etc....by someone who organize the communication. In other words it might come afterwards as level of analysis) @ Exactly Prof! That's what I mean :)

[Fine Gary A.] Federico is right as a social psychology. Some one - some person - makes decisions. Structure comes from people, although people try to do what is expected - and this expectation is where structure sneaks in.

[Question from Freschi Anna Carola] An important aspect is time. it is very different to interact just once, or to have the opportunity or the expectation to build a durable relationship.

[Everhart Katherine] I would speculate that basic status characteristics would become less relevant- so age, race/ethnicity, other appearance issues are not known. I'm not sure how this fits into my own enjoyment of this type of forum. Though I would think different types of characteristics become important- something to think about.@

[Fine Gary A.] As well as with the externalities that others employ to shape behavior.@ What will happen when computers regularly have cameras and so we could easily imagine in five years this site with images of each of us. Of course this might not happen because it would eliminate or diminish side involvements - multi-tasking.

[Treré Emiliano] In my opinion the virtual does not eliminate status and power balances, lots of Web 2.0 rhetoric stresses this, but we see how important these relationships still are even if they're changing thanks to ICTs@

[Fine Gary A.] This is one reason that it was so hard to develop visual group meetings without people in the same room.@

[Freschi Anna Carola] I agree with Emiliano

[Everhart Katherine] I agree Emiliano- I do not think it eliminates status/power- but rather changes them to different items that are less visible ones.

[Fine Gary A.] The question is how that status is made evident. How one writes is of course one way.

[Treré Emiliano] What do you mean by made evident?

[Everhart Katherine] Right - I was going to say writing and spelling- and response time are issues that may convey status?

[Fine Gary A.] That is how do we know the status of each other. How do you know who I am. This is a problem even in FTF, but there are more cues. Like the cartoon joke of two dogs sitting before a computer. One says, "Online no one knows you're a dog."

[Freschi Anna Carola] it depends on the situation. internet is not an homogenous space and interaction is not an homogeneous activity

[Fine Gary A.] No one knows you are a women, Hispanic, etc.

[Treré Emiliano] Remember "in internet none know you're a dog"...

[Segre Sandro] Any use of technology may be directed to control people, as the negative utopias of the 1940's illustrated so well. On the other hand, it may be instrumental to foster civic morals. Mass education is a case in point@

[Fine Gary A.] Anna is write. But then what are the cues of heterogeneity?

[Freschi Anna Carola] I think we need to think to the context of the interaction and to the goal

[Fine Gary A.] Civic virtue matters. But it is also a function of the homogeneity of the population. A decade ago (15 years ago?) it was assumed if you were on the internet, you were trustworthy. No longer. Now we need ways to determine trust. And this involves, as Anna says, the context of online interaction. @

[Freschi Anna Carola] If the relationship is not focused on a collective action, for example, but just on game, why should be so relevant to have 'real' cues?

[Treré Emiliano] Yes! good point, that's why even most famous blogs are becoming more like newspapers and vice versa. Trust is a crucial point I think.

[Freschi Anna Carola] I think that social relationship online need to be shaped along a duration, further interactions, and often intertwined with offline relationships.

[Everhart Katherine] I agree. I'm curious how trust happens in these varying types of groups, like Carola says- distinguishing a collective action group from a game. Is trust necessary in all online interactions? Is it more salient for certain groups? I'm sorry- Anna!@

[Fine Gary A.] But this is our critical sociological problem: of "real" cues. Real for what and how. Some kind of Goffman trust is needed. That is trust in the kind of frame that we are talking about?

[Segre Sandro] I'm afraid I must leave this forum. The questions which have been raised can be hardly discussed in any depth under these circumstances, but I have appreciated the discussion@

[Freschi Anna Carola] I agree, and, to be clear, game is a very serious issue too!

[Fine Gary A.] Are we trusting that we are in the same frame, even if it is a play frame. We'll miss you Sandro. Good fun. And is this a game or is it "for real." Well, of course it is both.

[Torrisi Giovanni] Sandro. Thanks for being with us.

[Fine Gary A.] Not game in the sense of dishonesty, but game in the sense of playing with ideas in a domain in which there will be few consequential personal status outcomes.

[Freschi Anna Carola] Simulation?

[Everhart Katherine] I'm not sure how relevant this may be- but a friend of mine plays one of the online games- and she was dishonest about her age to some of the individuals she met. Some of her other "friends" on the game found out her real age- and the relationships broke down. She was no longer on the game- as well as the community she had become part of no longer welcomed her.@

[Fine Gary A.] Simulation, of course. As in Steve Hoffman's article on Simulation in Sociological Theory 2006, How to Hit someone and stay friends@ Katherine, that presumed a certain sort of trust, which she violated. But consider this, what would the meaning and the value of the discussion be if you learned that I was not me but a graduate student, because I didn't want to spend the time. Would you be cheated. Or is the text - the same text - sufficient. Suppose "I" am an undergraduate (a smart, snarky one).

[Everhart Katherine] Right. I think what was interesting is that it is one of those games where they create avatars- which often are nothing like their true physical nature. So, the fact that age being violated was important, whereas others were less important.

[Fine Gary A.] Would this matter or do the ideas matter. Or, if I am a dog?

[Everhart Katherine] Very interesting question, Gary (or undergraduate proxy).

[Treré Emiliano] Or dog :-D

[Fine Gary A.] But why does misstating age matter - does it assume a simulation of FTF communication? Part of the issue is that communication is not entirely instrumental (where these issues shouldn't matter), but they are also expressive. And also connected to networks and to the status that comes with participation.@

[Everhart Katherine] I'm not sure. I don't know the whole story, but just heard about it from her. I think those spaces are interesting sites to investigate identity, status, etc.@

[Torrisi Giovanni] We construct a narrative of the other person, also in f2f communications. if this narrative is violated we feel violated as well.

[Fine Gary A.] Right. This narrative is part of the "romance of interaction." And this is betrayal.

[Torrisi Giovanni] There are some other few issues that need to be addressed. I am going to post Anna Carola fist question. Of course, the kind of groups you are writing about (disregarding their online or offline nature) seems to be self-selected. In some experimentations of deliberative democracy the access of the citizens to the new arena is determined by the promoters, who are often political institutions (at least in Europe). Do you think that this kind of groups can be considered an authentic tiny public? I think that also in digital sphere power relation count. It is a big difference to enter in connection because you choose, or because some power decides to put you in connection with some selected other people...

[Fine Gary A.] This then raises the twin, intertwined issues of authenticity and power to define. We select groups but groups select participation. (And members select groups and vice versa). But you are right to ask who gets to be a group in deliberative democracy. And what commitments do you need. Do you need a commitment to democracy? Skinheads? Anarchists? Totalitarians of left and right. Or do you have to commit to being willing to lose in the debate.

[Freschi Anna Carola] This is a problem, as the institutions tend to use these artificial groups as a substitutive of public sphere

[Fine Gary A.] I.e., they create the groups that they then listen to?

[Freschi Anna Carola] it can happen. these new artificial publics can be used to legitimate institutional decisions

[Fine Gary A.] Right. I think that we saw this will the Obama campaign in the US (the McCain campaign was not sufficiently wired - but next time both will sponsor these groups). I still get emails from the (extended) Obama campaign asking me to continue to do various things.

 

[Freschi Anna Carola] It seems to be a different strategy, more addressed to involve a larger public

[Fine Gary A.] Of course the issue of artificial publics comes at an early stage of the process. How will we use publics in a decade. I hope that I am still here. But, Anna, a larger public made up of smaller groups.@

[Freschi Anna Carola] :) a network of smaller groups, each of them with specific traits...

[Fine Gary A.] And a need for connections among the groups - those weak ties that Granovetter and Ron Burt talk about.@

[Treré Emiliano] Social network like the Facebook played a big role in connecting those weak ties@

[Fine Gary A.] Ah, Facebook.

[Freschi Anna Carola] Well, i argue that in the process of shaping a group and a network of groups can be more or less spontaneous, etero-directed, and that difference counts.

[Fine Gary A.] I have been trying to figure out - so far without success - how to use Facebook. All I seem to learn is that my friends are about to go to the grocery store. FB seems so unfocused. Anna is right to insist that we not throw all groups into the same bag. And this might be the underlying claim of the microsociologist. Everything that has the same structure is not the same.

[Treré Emiliano] It probably is...but it is interesting to see the formation of groups inside this Social network site which has now more 150 millions people@

[Question from Treré Emiliano] The adoption of technologies and new media in my view does not represent the creation of new virtual social movements or groups, but rather a new means of providing existing groups and movements with a trans-national capacity to operate, collaborate, share information and protest@

[Fine Gary A.] As an intellectual matter the networking of FB is fascinating, but as a matter of my own social life, I have found no use for FB.

[Treré Emiliano] Yes, I definitely understand your point. I am not that enthusiastic about it myself@

[Fine Gary A.] Mostly Emiliano you are correct, although I imagine that there will be some times and places in which movements can be formulated. OK, I think that we need to bring this to a close. I have a FTF colloquium in half an hour and have to drive to get there. I hope you found this valuable. I am exhausted, juggling these intellectual balls in the air.

[Kazepov Yuri] Thanks a lot for that Gary!

[Fine Gary A.] Intellectually multi-tasking.

[Torrisi Giovanni] For sure. We appreciated very much the opportunity. I hope you too.

[Fine Gary A.] And I wonder how this discussion compares to others.

[Freschi Anna Carola] Thank you very much!

[Treré Emiliano] Thanks for the opportunity and the hints!

[Torrisi Giovanni] Thus, I need to thank you veru much for the contribution and all the participants to the discussion.

[Fine Gary A.] See you all in virtual or real life.

[Freschi Anna Carola] Thank you to you giovanni!

[Torrisi Giovanni] This discussion will be published on the journal and directly inside the platform.

[Fine Gary A.] Yes, thank you Giovanni.

[Kazepov Yuri] Bye.

[Treré Emiliano] Thanks everybody for the interesting opportunity, bye!

[Freschi Anna Carola] bye!