“Today newspapers and magazines, radio and television are the media of the public sphere” (Habermas 1974).

Habermas believed that the early media supported the functioning of the public sphere. The early press played an important role in providing information and spreading debates, and initially it was mostly in private hands, rather than those of large commercial entities. A newspaper might be run from a single press beneath a small shop and have no real aim to make a profit. A variety of writers and critics would contribute, often unpaid, and engage with public debates, sharing their own views and helping to spread ideas around the nation. Early on, there was very little regulation of any kind; writers could express their ideas with very little oversight from either editors or the state.

The arrival of print and mass media helped to shape a sense of belonging within the national communities we live in, creating what scholar Benedict Anderson calls ‘imagined communities’ as societies shifted to become more homogeneous (Anderson 2006). For example, where there was initially a diversity in language and culture within the boundaries of feudal states, mass media contributed to the dominance of one ‘national’ language throughout a country. Over time, the press helped to generate sense of shared national community, which generates a sense that we as a nation are a ‘public’.

Overall, the early press supported the public sphere by spreading information and debate across the nation and helping to develop and share public opinion. By the 19th century, though, the mass media saw an increase in the presence of both state and corporate bodies, particularly through the emergence of the commercial press. Habermas is much more critical of the mass media’s role in the public sphere during this period. He argues that the interference of the state and commercial organizations — especially in areas where public communication shifted to become PR, advertising and entertainment — led to a ‘refeudalization’ of politics, which reduces the critical function of the public to a just group of spectators (Dahlgren 1995: 8). The rise of commercial press altered the way that mass media would function going forward. Rather than a place for public opinion to be debated, the media became a business. The drive for profit led to citizens now being seen as consumers, and the commercial press aims to provide entertainment, propaganda and sensational news over objective information and public deliberation.

Still, although the mass media is not free from state interference or commercial ownership, some still view it as a place in which the public sphere can operate. As the face-to-face public sphere became increasingly a mediated space where “everyone can observe but very few speakers can participate” (Wessler and Schultz in Butsch 2009: 16), the mass media offers ways of better informing and extending these discussions. The mass media can utilize political and social news to spark debate and discussion. They also provide an official space where contributors such as experts, politicians, or lobby groups can share information and commentaries, and where public opinion might be created and communicated to the government.

The media should assist in the functioning of the public sphere by helping citizens “learn about the world, debate their responses to it and reach informed decisions about what course of action to adopt” (Dahlgren 2005: 1). All forms of mass media have the potential to maintain the public sphere in this way, but today it is television that seems to have the most impact on society. Television news and current affairs programs can provide information and explore debates before a broad audience. Even drama series, though fictional, can discuss difficult topics and facilitate deliberation among viewers. Some television programs even manage to voice perspectives that are usually excluded from the mainstream public sphere.

Many argue that public service broadcasters like the BBC offer a form of mediated public sphere where programs aid in educating individuals and enabling places of discussion where we are treated as citizens rather than consumers. It is necessary, then, that regulation is in place to protect against domination and censorship from both large corporations and the state, so that this mediated public sphere can continue.