Über eine Million Dokumente umfasst das Internet-Angebot der EU – eine gewaltige Informationsmenge, die den Bürgern per Maus-Klick unter http://europa.eu zur Verfügung steht. Und doch beklagt Richard Upson vom Brüsseler Think Tank European Citizen Action Service ein „Informationsdefizit“. Zwar geht von Brüssel eine wahre Informationssturmflut aus, aber damit ist nicht gesagt, dass die Bürger die Informationen bekommen, die sie suchen und die für sie relevant sind. Die Folgen dieses Defizits zeigen sich am weit verbreiteten Unwissen über die EU, das auch einen Teil der Skepsis gegenüber der EU erklärt.
The article presents the results of a longitudinal newspaper analysis on the Europeanization of public discourses in five EU countries. It shows that European governance is increasingly subject to public scrutiny, but neither has a common discourse in Europe developed nor has the communication lag of the EU disappeared. Therefore the EU remains largely dependent on domestic processes of legitimation.
Sifft, Stefanie; Brüggemann, Michael; Kleinen-von Königslöw, Katharina; Peters, Bernhard; Wimmel, Andreas (2007): Segmented Europeanization. Exploring the Legitimacy of the European Union from a Public Discourse Perspective. In Journal of Common Market Studies 45 (1), pp. 127–156. Available online at https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2007.00706.x.
If there is no such thing as a European Public Sphere (EPS), why don’t we construct one? The answer seems to be obvious: There is no way one could construct a public sphere top-down since it depends on the active participation of speakers, the media and audience. In a democratic society they are free to deliberate with whom and about what they want. This article does not challenge the Habermasian notion of a public sphere evolving from the free discourse of the citizens. Nevertheless, the evolution of a public sphere is also structured by incentives and constraints imposed from above. The European Union structures the EPS – as a polity as well as through its policies and politics. While it is true that different policies such as media policy and all cultural policies matter for the public sphere, this paper concentrates on the Commission’s information policy as it constitutes the most direct link between the institution and the EPS. Seven different strategies of information policy will be presented which vary in their potential of creating or suppressing the evolution of a democratic public sphere. The extremes are marked by propaganda and arcane policy on the one hand and dialogue and transparency on the other hand. While the Commission pursued arcane policies for a long time, its approach to information has changed during the last decade. A change of paradigm might be under way but the legacy of European policy without “Offentlichkeit” constraints all attempts at pursuing more democratic information policies aimed at strengthening the public sphere.