1)Tremblay, Gaëtan: "Espace public et mutations des industries de la culture et de la communication"
2)Bouquillion, Ph. et Combès, Y: "Les mutations des ICIC, entre mutations des filières, des contenues et des sociétés"
3) Miège, Bernard: "Considérations et propositions méthodologiques sur les mutations en cours dans les industries culturelles et informationnelles"
Habermas, Jürgen: L'espace public. Archéologie de la publicité comme dimension constitutive de la société bourgeoise, Payot, Paris, 1978
Habermas, Jürgen, La technique et la science comme "idéologie", préface et traduction par J-R Ladmiral, Denoël, coll. "Médiations", Paris, 1984
Bonjour en directe du cours, voici les deux références des textes qui ont été photocopiés. Je n'ai pas les pages exacte sous la mains, je l'ai ajouterais un peu plus tard.

La préface de: 
Habermas, Jürgen. 1978. L'espace public archeologie de la publicite comme dimension constitutive de la societe bourgeoise. Paris: Payot, 324 p. 

L'introduction de : 
Calhoun, Craig J. 1992. Habermas and the public sphere. Cambridge: MIT Press, 498 p.

Habermas notes; from The structural transformation of the public sphere translation by thomas burger,mit press 2001 printing of 1989 translation first in paperback in 1991

I. Intro

Greek words:

polis for free citizens was separated from the Oikos, where each individual is in his own realm (idia?) BUT to be a free citizen you had to be master of your oikos; but the procurement of day to day living was private, in the oikos whereas the essence of freedom, excellence etc existed in the public sphere
public life, bios politikos, went on in the marketplace (agora)
publis sphere constituted in discussion (lexis), and in common action (praxis)
-these conceptions passed on through to modern era from Roman law; but in fact even in the middle ages the breakdown of power and authority (held by a lord in his manor, for example) did not break down neatly into these categories; in German feudalism the common man was the 'private' man and it was those with special powers who were lordly/public, but there was some basis of 'commons' that were public such as access to the fountain and market square BUT there was no real public sphere
=however there was the idea of the public representation of the important man (insignias, courtly virtues, etc.) which had to be embodied --so it wasn't carried in specific locals but embodied in the demeanor of important persons wherever they went
-the lowly were necessary but excluded, for example as lay people listening to mass in latin
-within German (ish?) areas, the word private makes its appearance only mid 16th C; private means not holding public office/being excluded from state apparatus and "public" referred to the state that existed (and was a distinct thing no longer completely determined by its ruler)
-so public=governmental, official business of gov and its institutions. which served the "public welfare"
-a first marker occurred when the public budget was separated from a prince's private holdings
-emergence of publishing (news, books etc) marked a big evolution from the 'publicity of representation' of noble-types towards a full on public sphere
-from the 16th century merchant companies became organized on a capital basis. No longer content with stable markets in stable goods, they started grand expeditions for new markets and products, assumed forms of stock companies. THIS REQUIRED STRONG POLITICAL GUARANTEES p.17 markets for foresign trade were considered "institutional products", requiring political efforts and military force to maintain
-this nationalisation of the town-based economy was how nationalism began
-created 'nations' of bureaucracies with financial needs, and which then required an efficient system of taxation
-the system of taxation was key: cemented separation between a prince's personal holdings and what belonged to the state
-local administrations were brought into becoming part of this national state
-w decline of 'public representation' nobles, room was created for a sphere of public authority, the 'objective' existence of a permanent administration and a standing army
public was becoming 'state related'
-individuals were no longer part of a larger feudal system of 'uperindividual purpose' so that each family's individual economy was the centre of its existence, but that economy took place in this new commodity market that was regulated/expanded/produced under public direction and supervision
-according to Hannah Arendt "society is the form in which the fact of mutual dependence for the sake of liefe and nothing else assumes public significance, and where the activities connected with sheer survival are permitted to appear in public"
-at this time, 17th C, the term economic moved from being just about the tasks of the oikos or household to the practice of running a business with the principles of profitability
-duties of head of household were narrowed and reduced to economical as thriftyness
-p.21 a really interesting view of the press: got leftover tidbits of what then passed through private correspondence and state censorship, ie. wars, harvest, taxes, trade reports etc.; this was mixed in with traditional 'local news' (trashy stuff! like fires, murders, etc)
-in fact many of the first journals originated out of offices that handwrote the private newsletters; commercial news was itself a commodity (more profit by making some of this news anonymous and public)
-soon press was made to serve interests of state administration
-gazettes run by governments arose, giving out both gov decrees and the latest pricing of things

-new bourgeois class arose that really constituted the central audience/practicing class of this new "public" . two layers: the 'professionals' of the new state admins: teachers, jurists, doctors etc. and then the more powerful layer of mercantalist/capitalists (bankers, merchants, entrepreneurs)--these people could not be assimilated into the old courtly life and this led to tension between court/town
-mercantilism was about public administration encouraging private enterprises; over time, these enterprises created new economies that were less dependent on local markets and more on interlinked regional and national markets
"taxes and duties and, generally, official interventions into the privatized household finally came to constitute the target of a developing critical sphere"
-the 'critical' element of a public sphere developed because private reproduction was coming under the zone of continuous administration of bureaucracies and so people had reactions to state decrees affecting them (ie. wheat shortage led to a decree of no bread to be eaten on fridays
-private people were beginning to come together to form a public, trying to public authority to legitimate itself before public opinion; in Britain, in mid 17th c, shifted from 'world' and 'mankind' to sue of word public

II. Social structures of public sphere
Bourgeois public sphere was the sphere of private people come together as a public
-bourgeois were private persons and as such did not 'rule' (p.28); they were not jockeying w/ princes and lords to divide powers of command, but were undercutting the principles on which that rule was based, opposing the 'publicity' of the prince using rational-critical deate
-something I don't get about how families and intimate sphere figure into this; idea being that the private being who became the 'public' was a household head with property, and that the political self-understanding of bourgeois originates here; anyways there is a polarization of state and society within this

-culture and the literary were the precursor to the forming of the public sphere
-literature and culture became a commodity, circulating, and it also became a general topic for discussion as culture became more publically accessible; a domain for private people to exercise reason on issues;
-not surprisingly psychology, the self-clarification of private people through reflection "on the genuiine experience of their novel privateness" p.29 arse during this era
-bourgeois learned art of critical reasoning and elegance(!) by mixing w/ aristocracy at high culture sites like places
-power moved from court to sites of private discussions in towns: coffeehouses in England (no women) salons in france (often run by women)
note that civil society, where commodity exchange and social labour take place, are in the private realm, as is the conjugal family's internal space; public sphere developing in political realm, in the world of letters (clubs and press) and in 'town' through market of cultural products; all this in opposition ot the state and court as spheres of public authority
-salons and coffee houses became the places where ideas and new works (music etc) were debuted before being written down or circulating more publicly/formally
--dialectical character where this first 'public sphere' develops under the aegis of private spaces like salons, so that reason is not directly contradicting/challenging the logic of the state
-institutional criteria of these first salons, coffeehouses, table societies etc:
1. in principle status was disregarded, power through public office or economic dependencies were presumed to have no influence, goal of 'common humanity'
2. discussion problematized areas that had until then not been questioned or considered 'of common concern'; culture and art and their circulation intimately caught up/linked to this process. In fact in the 18th c the commodification and wider circulation of cultural products in this way created spheres of 'art' and 'culture' that were separate from the reproduction of social life (???? not sure about this but this is what H says)
3. the newly constituted public was the principle consumer/participant in commodified culture; accessible to all (? or more, anyways); the immersive category of public that was all private people -really the bourgeois
-looks at shifts in formations of public by looking at arts going publics eg. theatre, reading (from patron to public-as-patron via a commercial publisher as intermediary); most visible with music, which used to be part of the performance of "the publicity of representation" ie. having a direct purpose of ceremony and circumstance in the court or at church; but then private music colleges sprung up and public concert societies; music became detached from ceremonial purpose and became purposeless and therefore an artefact subject to taste! an object of free choice and changing preference Note the dovetailing with the ideas of Bordieu around taste formation, art criticism etc.
-concomitant rise of 'criticism' almost and industry of criticism and art critics who were lay people; art criticism became institutionalized through journals and etc. ; an explosion of art criticism took place in the 18th c.
p.42"On the one hand, philosohy was no longer possible except as critical philosohy, literature and art no longer except in connection with literary and art criticism. What the works of art criticized simply reached its proper end in the "critical jounrals" On the other hand, it was only through the critical absorption of philosohy, literature, and art that the pulic attained enlightenment and realized itself as the latter's living process."

-changing nature of family seen in changed architecture of houses; more segmented off so everyone had their private room and the common areas of domestic life (courtyard, family room) became insignificant and replaced in significance by a 'salon' that was really a room for society (not one's intimate friends but the whole salon circle)
-the space of the home as scene for psychological emancipation, a view of the family sphere as private and free/cut off from connection with society, althogh it was dependent on the sphere of labour and of commotdity exchange;
-for bourgeois, appearance of autonomy because not ruled so much by a ruler +obedience to his rule as by obedience to abstract principles of market; i guess there is supposed to be a homology between this autonomy an the 'self-presentation of human beings in the family" (p.46); a view of the family as established by free individuals without coercion, love of two spouses, cultivation of a family life separate from extrinsic purposes --of course the reality was very patriarchal, grounded in capitalism etc.
-3 elements: voluntariness, community of love, and culttivation made a concept of humanity of an 'inner realm' that is emancipated from extrinsic influence, follows its own laws
-but really geneology of family kept continuity link for material accumulation of capital
-discussion of the letter as a literary form ebmodying these ideas about a private sphere of idnividuals independent from the economy; meant for scholarly communication and familial courtesy, but also carried news and came from the news report condition; but also age of sentimentality full of 'heart' stuff
-subejctivity, as the innermost core of the private, was in letter writing actually oriented to a public --not surprisingly, the domestic novel, with psychological description + autobiographical form, emerged as very popular; eg. the novel written in letters, even Rousseau (La Nouvelle Heloise) and Goethe (werthers Leiden) used it
-p.50 relationship between author, work and public changed: they became initmate mutual relationships between privatized individuals who were psychologically interested in whaht was "human", in self-knowledge and in empathy
-so emerged fiction and the psychological novel
-just as salon and living room were under the same roof, the subjectivity of the privatized individual was related from the very start to publicity, conjoined in literature that had become fiction
p.51 how the 'fit to print' subjectivity became the modelling of familial life, but also, readers come togetehr in 'publics' to read and discuss books; book clubs, reading circles, subscription libraries etc. shot up
Basically, the public sphere that was created through practices in literature (letters, familial subjectivity, leading to psychological novel but also people coming together to talk about them) was ready made, as a sphere of criticism and public authority with its own institutions and forums of discussion, to be reoriented to political realm
-the rise of a sphere of the social; public opinion battled with public power; issue no longer about citizenry acting in common to administer laws or deal with military survival; now the deal is the regulation of civil society, and the protection of a commercial economy
-this fits with Foucault's ideas about the need to police/regulate bigger areas of political life in the modern state
-also in this time, a concept of 'law' regulating people's behavior as arising from natural law, natural relations between the nature of things, became more popular
-idea of law not as whim or particular to one monarch, but idea of Hobbes, "truth not authority makes law" p.53: "In the "law" the quintessence of general, abstract, and permanent norms, inheres a rationality in which hwat is right converges with what is just; the exercise of power is to be demoted to a mere executor of such norms
-essentially, the 'public sphere' logic is that 'public opinion' in the public sphere will discover the universal laws/truths that should govern; many paradoxes:
=because the rules are "universal" /external to individuals, they left space for the individuals to develop their subjectivity/interiority
-objective rules make space for subjectivity
-abstract rules make roon for concrete
-'public sphere' concept served to conflate two roles of privatized individuals forming publics: "property owner" and 'pure human being subject to natural laws'