What might this mean, why might it be (or not be) a useful concept? Provide 3-5 linked examples to illustrate your argument.
The term ‘networked counterpublics’ can be most accurately defined by focusing on the individual terminology of ‘networked’ and ‘counter publics.’ Counterpublics represent minority groups that are excluded from the mainstream public sphere. Their insular status and under-proliferation of their interests and stances are the reasons for the term ‘counter-publics.’ These groups may form around shared marginalized opinions, interests, and issues. It has often been argued that counter publics are dissents that challenge the state and societal norms of the public sphere. I personally disagree with this idea that counter publics must be discordant with governments–the public sphere does not necessarily equate with government.
Here are some examples of counter publics:
-feminist counterpublic: Heya TV for Arab Women (http://cssaame.dukejournals.org/content/27/3/513.full.pdf+html)
-In my personal human rights activism efforts, I find that in my Amnesty International organization, our efforts of freeing prisoners of conscience can be considered a counterpublic sphere of prison writing–an efforts to spread awareness of injustice that certainly does not have a widespread awareness nor participation.
-In cities throughout the world, ghettos and slums can also be considered counter publics–such as South Central in Los Angeles and the Bronx in New York.
As for the term ‘networked,’ this signifies the interconnectedness within counter publics, facilitated by the use of information technology. Counterpublics use these tools to proliferate their causes and to have a larger presence in the dominant public sphere. However, I have come to wonder…once a networked counter public successfully uses information technology–through the internet and whatnot–to catch the attention of the public and then gains widespread attention, wouldn’t it no longer be considered a counter public?
An example of a networked counter public is Counterpublic Collective in NYC, which facilitates Facebook to unite likeminded individuals to support their cause of gay/queer rights or simply to spread awareness: http://www.facebook.com/counterpubliccollective?sk=info
Another insightful perspective that blogger ‘gabi’ put forth is the idea that the term ‘networked counter publics’ is redundant and far too obvious–what counter public is not already networked?
Certainly, in a historical lens, counter publics weren’t alway necessarily networked with technology but in the present, I agree that it is accurate to say that all counter publics are networked. The internet provides instant international access and distribution–a free space where any counter public can define and develop itself.
Networked counter publics may be beneficial to society in that their relentless efforts to proliferate their cause may help develop alternative, creative media that would make communication more effective and efficient.
Regardless of time era or location, counter publics are omnipresent and there is no doubt that with the continual technological innovations, ‘networked counter publics’ will be the norm.