Political Communication Online: a new cultural space and the transformation of practices

Author: Aleksandr I. Novikov 

Communicology. 2018. Vol.6. No.2
Aleksandr Ivanovich Novikov, applicant at St. Petersburg State University; general manager at ZAO PetroCity. Address: 197110, St. Petersburg, Bolshaya Raznochinnaya st., 28. E-mail: anovikov@yandex.ru.

Abstract. Political culture undergoes changes associated with the virtualization of everyday life and the transformation of publicity that occurs in the context of Internet spaces. The methodological basis of this publication is the theory of the communicative action of Jurgen Habermas. He describes an ideal-typical model of the public sphere, as well as critical limitations for the implementation of political processes in it. The Internet as a new cultural space presents the participants of the political process with a set of opportunities for overproduction of their living space, thus creating new forms of political participation that have the potential, as they develop, to become an alternative to real forms of political participation. In the Internet space, political discussion is of particular importance, as one of the varieties of political communication. The Internet is an environment of mostly textual nature, in which the subject of the discussion has fundamentally different properties. The virtual nature of communication expands the conceptual framework of political participation.

Keywords: Internet, politics, political science, culture, political culture, political communication, cultural space

Text: PDF

For citation: Novikov A.I. Political Communication Online: a new cultural space and the transformation of practices. Communicology (Russia). 2018. Vol. 6. No.2. P. 74-84. DOI 10.21453 / 2311-3065-2018-6-2-74-84.

Bakhtin MM (1976). Forms of time and chronotope in the novel. Essays on historical poetics. Aesthetics of verbal creativity. Moscow. P. 316-355.
Braudel F. (1994). What is France. Moscow. P. 130
Cádima F.R. (2017). Media, diversity and globalisation in the digital age. Janus.net, 8 (2): 88-100.
Dunaeva R.A. (2009). Anthropological Dimension of Virtual Reality. Scientific Bulletin No. 8 (63). P. 137 (In Rus).
Gofman I. (2000). Introducing yourself to others in everyday life. Moscow (In Rus).
Gutkin O.V., Listvina E.V., Petrova G.N., Semenishcheva O.A. (2005). The phenomenon of cultural space. Saratov (In Rus).
Habermas Y. (2016). Structural change in the public sphere: research on the category of bourgeois society. Moscow (In Rus).
Heidegger M. (2010). Being and Time. Moscow (In Rus).
Jungherr A. (2017). The Internet in political communication: State of the field and research perspectives (Review). Politische Vierteljahresschrift, 58 (2): 284-315.
Karmin A.S. (1997). Fundamentals of Cultural Studies. Historiography of Culture. St. Petersburg (In Rus).
Kim S.-H., Tak H., Kim H., Cho H.-G. (2017). Constructing dispute social network for internetbased discussion participants using virtual heat model of threaded replying trees. Multidisciplinary International Social Networks Conference, MISNC. Volume Part F129682; Bangkok; Thailand; Article No. 3092129.
Komarova L.V. (2013). Culture of Dialogue as a Means of Civil Society Development. Communicology. No. 2 (2): 144-152.
Lebon G. (1995). Psychology of peoples and masses. St. Petersburg (In Rus).
Lee F.L.. Lee P.S., So C.Y, Leung L., Chan M.C. (2017). Conditional impact of Facebook as an information source on political opinions: the case of political reform in Hong Kong Asian. Journal of Political Science, 25 (3): 365-382.
Machado R.C., Rivera L.N. (2017). Democratization in the digital age: Challenges for a conscious and equal dialogue. Revista Brasileira de Politicas Publicas, 7 (3): 602-616.
McLuhan M. (2004). The Gutenberg galaxy. The creation of a man of printed culture. Kiev (In Rus). Orlova E.V. (2010). Cultural space: definition, specificity, structure. Analitica culturologists.
No.18. P. 42-53 (In Rus).
Pfetsch B. (2018). Dissonant and Disconnected Public Spheres as Challenge for Political Communication Research. Javnost, P. 1-8.
Saraf M.Y. (2013). Measurement of the cultural space. Space and time. 1(11): 63 (In Rus). Schultz E.E. (2014). Technology of rebellion: «Colored» revolutions and «Arab Spring». National
interests: priorities and security. No. 19 (In Rus).
Spengler O. (1998). The Decline of Europe. Image and reality. Moscow. P. 56 (In Rus).
Surma I. (2016). Pushing the boundaries of digital diplomacy: The international experience and the Russian practice. Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security, ICCWS: 304-311.
Toepfl F. (2018). From connective to collective action: internet elections as a digital tool to centralize and formalize protest in Russia. Information Communication and Society, 21 (4): 531-547.
Vasilenko V.I. (2013). Social networks in a globalizing world: a culture of security and democracy. Communicology. 2 (2): 77-82 (In Rus).
Verbilovich O. (2013). Theory of communicative action: key categories and cognitive potential. Public sphere: theory, methodology, stage case. P. 35-52. (In Rus).
Zheltov V.V., Zheltov M.V. (2014). Internet, protest movements and the Arab Spring. Territory of new opportunities. No.1 (24) (In Rus).