1   Community  Broadcasting:  Publics,  Participants  and  Policies       5.  Community       Understanding  the  nature  of  communities  and  their  corresponding  media  structures  is  an   important  subject  of  this  thesis,  and  for  scholars  who  explore  the  concepts  of  access,   participation,  identity,  and  community  development.  Early  theoretical  examination  of  the  term   ‘community’  is  most  associated  with  Ferdinand  Tönnies  (1887),  the  German  sociologist  who  in   the  late  19th  century  authored  the  iconic  text  Gemeinschaft  und  Gesellschaft,  in  which  he   compared  the  meaning  of  community  in  the  description  of  a  small  village  ‘Gemeinschaft’,   versus  a  worldwide  organizational  network  or  ‘Gesellschaft’.  The  Chicago  School  of  sociologists   in  the  20th  century  is  generally  credited  with  initially  investigating  the  phenomenon  of   "community"  in  the  context  of  urban  studies.  Louis  Wirth  (1964)  identified  communities'   contributions  to  culture  and  inclusiveness  in  his  book  On  Cities  and  Social  Life,  and  later  William   Foote  Whyte  (1993)  explored  the  concept  in  his  book  Street  Corner  Society,  describing  the   social  structure  of  an  Italian  slum.  Other  sociologists  to  examine  the  concept  include  (Williams   1973,  Putnam  2000,  and  Bartle  2003),  while  other  scholars  seek  to  explain  the  subject  through   various  frames  including  organizational  communication  (MacMillan  and  Chavis  1986),   community  development  (McKnight  1989  and  Bhattacharyya  2004),  and  mass  media  (Lewis   1993,  Carpentier  et  al  2003,  Howley  2005).     The  idea  of  community  as  an  ambiguous  and  multi-­‐faceted  concept  presents  a  challenge  in   identifying  and  defining  the  term  clearly  (Cohen  1985).  Morris  and  Morten  echo  Tönnies  when   they  compare  community  to  the  larger  frame  of  society,  which  is  “a  colder,  unattached  and   more  fragmented  way  of  living  devoid  of  cooperation  and  social  cohesion”  (1998:23).  The   phenomenon  of  community  is  often  described  as  a  subset  of  society  defined  by  geography,   identity,  interest,  social  class,  economic  status,  and/or  by  completely  external  forces  and   events.  Indeed,  community  is  not  necessarily  a  static  or  easily  identifiable  entity,  but  more  of  an   aggregation  of  its  component  parts  (Gordon  2009).  The  term  “knowable  communities”  was   coined  by  Raymond  Williams  (1973:163)  in  his  work  discussing  the  development  of  more   complex  societies  of  modernity,  where  he  described  community  as  a  collection  of  connections   and  relationships  that  further  define  social  divisions  and  identities.       Those  connections  Williams  refers  to  are  described  by  sociologists  when  explaining  the   elements  and  patterns  of  social  interaction  and  social  networks.  Social  interaction  requires  a   process  and  nodes  of  connections,  described  by  Deleuze  and  Guattari  (1987)  as  the  rhizomatic     2   effect  that  forms  "connections  between  semiotic  chains,  organizations  of  power,  and   circumstances  relative  to  the  arts,  sciences,  and  social  struggles"  (:7).  The  term  social  network   in  the  context  of  this  thesis  is  a  theoretical  construct  used  to  describe  relationships  among   individuals,  groups,  and  communities  in  relatively  small  scale  adaptions,  as  opposed  to  large-­‐ scale  applications  such  as  online  communities  or  even  entire  societies.  Actor-­‐network  theory  is   used  by  Bruno  LaTour  (2005)  and  his  colleagues  to  explore  how  rhizomes  that  form   communities  grow  through  activities  leveraging  both  material  and  semiotic  networks  to  create   meaning.  Building  upon  the  works  of  Talcott  Parsons  (2007)  and  Peter  Blau  (1960),  Charles  Tilly   (1973)  described  communities  as  aggregations  of  social  networks  formed  around  themes  such   as  culture  and  politics.  Intentionally-­‐built  communities  access  networks  to  assemble  members   with  shared  interests,  identities  or  concerns  including  social,  environmental,  economic  and   political  issues  (Peck  1987).  These  practices  and  dynamics  are  important  for  understanding  the   importance  of  community  development  in  the  process  of  communicative  action  (Markova   1997).     Intentional  communities  are  also  a  subject  of  Robert  Putnam's  Bowling  Alone  (1995),  in  which   he  emphasizes  the  importance  of  communities  as  represented  in  traditional  civic,  social  and   fraternal  organizations.  He  argues  that  participation  in  community-­‐based  organizations  and   activities  can  facilitate  building  of  social  capital  through  interactions  both  among  neighbors  and   friends  ("bonding  capital"),  as  well  as  other  citizens  outside  an  actor's  immediate  sphere   ("bridging  capital").  However,  just  as  networks  can  connect  and  construct  communities,  the   failure  of  connections  and  networks  can  inhibit  the  establishment  and  sustainability  of   communities,  and  contribute  to  the  social  disconnection  that  many  communities  experience  in   the  context  of  modern  society.  In  many  cases,  individuals  encounter  challenges  in  developing   relationships  into  stronger  community  groups,  and  entire  community  groups  then  struggle  for   networking  success  as  they  seek  to  connect  in  this  complex  environment.  Putnam  describes  the   decline  of  physical  intentional  communities  in  the  1970s  United  States  caused  in  part  by  the   proliferation  of  highly-­‐centralized  mass  media  that  reduce  local  interactions  and  discourse,   noting  that  "Watching  commercial  entertainment  TV  is  the  only  leisure  activity  where  doing   more  of  it  is  associated  with  lower  social  capital"  (Putnam  2015).  In  Bowling  Alone:  The  Collapse   and  Revival  of  American  Community  (2000),  and  in  the  Harvard  University  Saguaro  Seminar  on   Civic  Engagement,  Putnam  and  his  colleagues  explore  potential  remedies  for  the  downward   spiral  of  civic  engagement,  suggesting  more  local  interaction  is  key:  "We  need  to  look  at  front   porches  as  crime  fighting  tools,  treat  picnics  as  public  health  efforts  and  see  choral  groups  as   occasions  of  democracy"  (Feldstein  2000).     Location  is  a  frame  by  which  communities  are  often  identified.  Originating  in  anthropological   studies,  a  community  of  location  typically  requires  physical  boundaries  to  delineate  the     3   community  identity,  for  example  a  settlement,  village,  or  city.  Milioni  (2009)  describes   community  as  “social  integration  defined  by  geographical  proximity”  (:411).  Communities  of   location  are  readily  identified  and  comprehended  by  typical  citizens,  who  can  physically  seek   out  cooperation  and  collaboration  with  their  neighbors  without  extensive  need  for  external   tools.  These  spatial  situations  are  fertile  environments  for  social  interaction,  and  the   subsequent  construction  of  multiple  social  groupings  as  communities  through  cooperative   efforts  develop  a  synergy  and  the  resulting  social  capital  for  their  common  good.  This  can  be   seen  in  Oldenburg's  (1989:16)  "third  place"  that  is  "a  generic  designation  for  a  great  variety  of   public  places  that  host  the  regular,  voluntary,  informal,  and  happily  anticipated  gatherings  of   individuals  beyond  the  realm  of  home  and  work”.     Cohen  (1985)  suggests  that  culture,  in  addition  to  location,  forms  the  basis  and  boundaries  for   many  communities,  noting  that  residents  establish  their  membership  in  a  community  through   self-­‐identification.  Hernando  Rojas  writes  in  his  examination  of  community  engagement   "Communication  mediates  the  relationship  between  community  integration  and  civic   participation...in  an  intervening  process  between  structural  location  and  belonging"  (:4).   Jankowski  (2002)  identifies  communities  of  interest:  “whereby  members  share  some  cultural,   social  or  political  interests  independent  of  geographical  proximity”  (:6).  Compared  to  location,   intricate  relationships  of  interest  or  identity  are  more  difficult  to  recognize  across  the  barriers   and  obstructions  of  modern  day  society  (Williams  1973).  This  constructivist  approach,  relating   social  representations  to  community  building,  is  grounded  in  social  practices  and  group   dynamics.       Virtual  online  communities  of  interest  that  characterize  new  online  social  media  forms  have   added  to  the  mass  media  options  for  actors'  connectedness  and  participation.  Social  media  has   also  added  great  vigor  to  debates  over  the  primacy  of  proximity  in  identifying  communities.   Many  scholars  (Kollock  and  Smith  1999,  Matei  and  Britt  2011,  Marinov  and  Schimmelfennig   2015)  exhibit  optimism  about  the  potential  for  social  media  to  eliminate  the  need  for  proximity,   as  “virtual  identity  communities”  successfully  connect  and  transmit  content  in  multiple   directions.  Centola  (2015)  suggests  that  social  media's  connectedness  is  actually  enhanced  by   the  the  self-­‐imposed  boundaries  of  identity  communities  (see  Figure  10).  However,  despite  the   widespread  adaptation  of  the  term  “community”  by  social  media,  other  scholars  (O’Connor   2008,  LoPresti  2013)  remain  skeptical.  Tom  Sander  (2008:15)  cautions  against  “romanticizing”   online  communities,  suggesting  that  “just  calling  something  a  community  doesn’t  make  it  one.   This  all  needs  to  be  empirically  tested".         4     Figure  10:  Identity  communities  in  social  networks  (Centola  2015)                                                 Bhattacharyya,  J.  (2004).  "Theorizing  Community  Development".  In  Journal  of  the  Community   Development  Society.  Vol  34  No.  2.     Bartle,  P.  (2010).  What  is  Community?  A  Sociological  Perspective.  New  York:  Hyperion.         5   Blau,  Peter  (1960).  "A  Theory  of  Social  Integration."  The  American  Journal  of  Sociology,  (65)6:   545-­‐556.     Blau,  P.  and  J.  Schwartz.  (1984).  Crosscutting  Social  Circles:  Testing  a  Macrostructural  Theory  of   Intergroup  Relations.  Piscataway,  NJ.:  Transaction  Publishers.     Centola,  D.  (2015).  The  Social  Origins  of  Networks  and  Diffusion.  American  Journal  of  Sociology.   Volume  120,  Number  5.     Cohen,  A.  (1985)  The  Symbolic  Construction  of  Community.  London:  Routledge.     Deleuze,  G.  and  F.  Guattari.  (1987).  A  Thousand  Plateaus:  Capitalism  and  Schizophrenia.   London:  Continuum.     Feldstein,  L.  (2000).  “Better  Together”.  http://www.bettertogether.org/  Accessed  16.1.2016     Kollock,  P.  and  M.  Smith.  (1999).  Communities  in  Cyberspace.  London:  Routledge.     LaTour,  B.  (2005).  Reassembling  the  Social:  An  Introduction  to  Actor-­‐Network-­‐Theory.  Oxford:   Oxford  University  Publishing.     Lewis,  P.  (1993).  Alternative  Media  in  a  Contemporary  Social  and   Theoretical  Context.  In:  Lewis,  P.  (ed.),  Alternative  Media:  Linking  Global  and  Local,  Paris:   UNESCO,  pp.  15-­‐25.     LoPresti,  L.  (2013).  What  is  Social?  Healthy  Skepticism  in  the  Social  Economy.  Createspace.com.     Marinov,  N.  and  F.  Schimmelfennig.  (2015),  Does  Social  Media  Promote  Civic  Activism?  Evidence   from  a  Field  Experiment.  Center  for  Comparative  and  International  Studies,  ETH  Zürich.     Matei,  S.  and  B.  Britt.  (2011).  “Virtual  Sociability:  From  Community  to  Communitas”.  Selected   papers  from  the  Purdue  Online  Interaction  Theory  Seminar,  vol.  1.  Indianapolis,  IN.:  Ideagora.     McKnight,  J.  (1989).  Beyond  Community  Services.  Evanston,  IL:  Northwestern  University.     McMillan,  D.,  and  D.  Chavis.  (2006).  "Sense  of  Community:  A  Definition  and  Theory."  In  Journal   of  Community  Psychology.  Special  Issue:  Psychological  Sense  of  Community,  I:  Theory  and   Concepts.  Vol  14  Issue  1,  Pp.  6-­‐23.     6     Milioni,  D.  (2009b).  “Probing  the  Online  Counterpublic  Sphere:  the  Case  of  Indymedia  Athens”.   Media,  Culture  &  Society  31(3):  409-­‐431     Morris,  A.,  and  G.  Morton.  (1998).  Locality,  Community  and  Nation.  London:  Hodder  &   Stoughton.     O’Connor,  R.  (2008).  “Word  of  Mouse:  Credibility,  Journalism  and  Emerging  Social  Media”.  Joan   Shorenstein  Center  on  the  Press,  Politics  and  Public  Policy  Discussion  Paper  Series  #D‐50,   February  2009.     Oldenburg,  R.  (1989).  The  Great  Good  Place:  Cafes,  Coffee  Shops,  Community  Centers,  Beauty   Parlors,  General  Stores,  Bars,  Hangouts,  and  How  They  Get  You  Through  the  Day.  New  York:   Paragon  House.     Parsons,  T.  (2007).  American  Society:  Toward  a  Theory  of  Societal  Community.  Edited  by  G.   Sciortino.  St.  Paul,  MN.:  Paradigm.     Peck,  M.  (1987).  The  Different  Drum:  Community-­‐Making  and  Peace.  New  York:  Simon  &   Schuster.     Putnam,  R.  (1995).  "Bowling  Alone:  America’s  Declining  Social  Capital,”  Journal  of  Democracy,   vol.  6,  no.  1  (January  1995),  pp.  65-­‐78.     Putnam,  R.  (2000).  Bowling  Alone:  The  Collapse  and  Revival  of  American  Community.  New  York:   Simon  &  Schuster.     Putnam,  R.  (2015).  “Bowling  Alone”.  Essay.  http://bowlingalone.com/  Accessed  16.1.2016     Rojas,  H.  (2005).  A  Communicative  Approach  to  Social  Capital:  Building  a  Theoretical  and   Empirical  Model  of  Communication  and  Community  Engagement.  Madison,  WI.:  University  of   Wisconsin.     7     Sander,  T.  (2008).  Interview  with  Rory  O'Connor.  in  “Word  of  Mouse:  Credibility,  Journalism  and   Emerging  Social  Media”.  p.  15.  Joan  Shorenstein  Center  on  the  Press,  Politics  and  Public  Policy   Discussion  Paper  Series  #D‐50,  February  2009.     Tilley,  C.  (1973).  "Do  Communities  Act?".  Sociological  Inquiry.  43:  209–40.     Tönnies,  F.  (1887).  Gemeinschaft  und  Gesellschaft.  Leipzig:  Fues's  Verlag.