VISIONS OF DEMOCRACY IN THE INFORMATION SOCIETY: THE THEORIES OF DANIEL BELL, MANUEL CASTELLS, AND YOCHAI BENKLER A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNICATION AND THE COMMITTEE ON GRADUATE STUDIES OF STANFORD UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY ANDREAS KONSTANTINOS KATSANEVAS MARCH 2020 © 2020 by Andreas Konstantinos Katsanevas. All Rights Reserved. Re-distributed by Stanford University under license with the author. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial 3.0 United States License. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/us/ This dissertation is online at: http://purl.stanford.edu/dp848hh5120 ii I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Fred Turner, Primary Adviser I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Angele Christin I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Shane Denson I certify that I have read this dissertation and that, in my opinion, it is fully adequate in scope and quality as a dissertation for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. James Hamilton Approved for the Stanford University Committee on Graduate Studies. Stacey F. Bent, Vice Provost for Graduate Education This signature page was generated electronically upon submission of this dissertation in electronic format. An original signed hard copy of the signature page is on file in University Archives. iii Abstract In this dissertation, I unearth the common threads and subtle evolution of democratic ideals in mainstream theories of the information society that span over thirty years. I apply the lens of democratic theory, with a primary focus on liberal and republican traditions, to perform a close reading of seminal works such as Daniel Bell’s (1973) Post-Industrial Society, Manuel Castells’ (1996; 1997; 1998) Information Age trilogy, and Yochai Benkler’s (2006) Wealth of Networks. Through a comparative analysis, I expose the democratic canvas upon which these scholars paint their images of a rising social organization that is structured around flows of information and knowledge. Two democratic axioms stand at the center of an emergent model of information democracy. The first axiom prescribes the ideal democratic subject with the affective trait of social awareness; this model of democracy, I argue, presumes that its citizens are always ready and willing to understand, to share, and to empathize with others in their community. The second axiom refers to the idea that technologically facilitated communication can help deliver, grow, and sustain the individual citizens’ capacity for social awareness. Flows of information operate as the democratic citizens’ eyes and ears into the lives of others, facilitating mutual understanding. Thus, democracy in the information society realizes the common good through the affective orientation of each and every individual towards the social other, and through flows of information and knowledge that support such an orientation. The presence of these two axioms allows these scholars, in turn, to weld two ideals usually considered antithetical to each other – the liberal ideal of individual freedom and the republican ideal of the common good. iv Acknowledgments The relationship between the individual and the community is not only a foundational conceptual distinction in my dissertation; it has also been central to its actual completion. My work has been as much the result of the community that I surround myself with, as it has been the outcome of personal effort. I am grateful to my friends, colleagues, and family in Greece, the Bay Area, and Toronto who enriched my life in unique ways. Nick Bondouroglou, Tasos Anastatiadis, Orestis Sitis, Leo Yeykelis, Jim Cummings, as well as family members Andreas G. Papandreou, Nick Papandreou, Stamos, Lina, and Vasilis Venios, and of course my father Theodore and brother Kostas Katsanevas: Whether virtually or in person, thank you for being there for me during the countless hours of reading, writing, and TA grading, as invaluable participants in conversation, and as pitstops of laughter in the times I needed it most. I would also like to thank the Communication department staff, who happily and tirelessly all tagged along on this long journey, even though at times it seemed that it would never end. Katrin Wheeler, Mark Sauer, Mark DeZutti, and so many others who make this department run so well, in turn ensuring its students’ success. I would also like to express my gratitude to our department faculty and instructors, especially to those who gave me a chance to teach and collaborate in projects with them, and who offered me valuable advice over the years: Byron Reeves, Jeremy Bailenson, Jen Pan, Gaby Harari, Dave Voelker, Jim Fishkin, and Ted Glasser. My dissertation committee members – Jay Hamilton, Angèle Christin, Shane Denson – surrounded me with a warm can-do attitude, and always asked challenging v questions that aimed to elevate the quality of my work; Thank you so much for your support. Also, I am very grateful for the collaboration and friendship that I developed with Jen King at the Stanford Law School over the past couple of years. Working with Jen has helped me see how academic work can be both rigorous and public oriented. This journey, however, would not be possible without the support of three exceptional people. My words here express only a fraction of my gratitude and admiration for their presence in my life. Fred Turner, thank you for teaching me how to teach, for helping me realize my potential, and for always giving the best advice – I mean not only academic, but also life advice. Most of the good things in this dissertation are a result of our conversations; they are the outcome of your unwavering trust in my ability to see this project through. Chloe Edmondson, you have been my foundation of optimism whenever the work seemed insurmountable. You have read every draft, giving me impeccable feedback that was weaved into bundles of kindness. You endured almost two years of “dissertation eyes” – a magnanimous feat indeed – while remaining the most intellectually curious, understanding, and loving partner. Thank you from the bottom of my heart. Sophia Papandreou, mom, your calm presence, your unconditional support, your ethic of care, really made this dissertation possible. I take from you my love for learning and a deep respect for the value of education. I follow your lead to never give up, to always be generous to others, and to believe in my voice, no matter how long it may have taken me to find it. I dedicate this dissertation to you. March 2020 Stanford, California. vi Table of Contents Abstract .............................................................................................................................. iv Acknowledgments ............................................................................................................... v Table of Contents .............................................................................................................. vii Preface ................................................................................................................................. 1 Chapter 1: Democratic Theory: Liberalism, Republicanism, and Communication .......... 10 Chapter 2: Welding Marxism and Liberalism in Bell’s Model of Democracy ................. 42 Chapter 3: Freedom and the Common Good in Castells’ Social Movement Democracy ........................................................................................................................ 89 Chapter 4: Active Citizenship for Social Equality in Benkler’s Networked Democracy ...................................................................................................................... 141 Conclusion: Always On, Always Sharing: Affective Citizenship in an Information Democracy ...................................................................................................................... 199 References ....................................................................................................................... 214 vii Preface Preface Debates about the information society rarely exclude the work of Daniel Bell, Manuel Castells, and Yochai Benkler. Critics may disagree with them, but they cannot escape their centrality – especially the agenda-setting quality of each author’s magnum opus. For example, Daniel Bell’s (1973) The Coming of Post-Industrial Society is considered to have “exerted a profound influence on the discourse on the economy in the information age” (Stalder, 2006, p. 43). Written a quarter of a century later, Castells’ (1996; 1997; 1998) Information Age trilogy has been hailed as “worthy of succeeding and superseding Bell,” and deserving a place in the tradition of “Karl Marx and Max Weber” (Webster, 2006, p. 446). While it is the most recent of the three, Yochai Benkler’s (2006) Wealth of Networks has also received praise beyond its years, prompting Lawrence Lessig to describe Benkler as the “leading intellectual of the information age” (Melber, 2010). While these three works span a period of more than thirty years, they share a common vision