I just had an interesting thought (I’ll admit, while reading A Consumers’ Republic by Cohen). A typical argument for privatizing a commons, like a road, hospital, network, or a public space, is that it will improve if someone can a buck off of it. For example, while the post office once was a place for people to meet and discuss issues of local importance (see John, Spreading the News), another more modern equivalent might be the coffee house or book shop (or WalMart, or Barnes and Noble). Yet, it stands to reason that people hanging around a place like this talking for hours on end will not result in the establishment earning a maximum profit. Instead, the emphasis on “buying things” at locations may tend to divide people rather than bring them together — thus preventing much of a public sphere from forming. To clarify, the profit motive of consumerism seems like it runs so counter to the ideals of a commons, that it may have an impact on the formation of the modern public sphere. I’m struggling for a defense of public commons here.
Looks like it’s back to Bowling Alone in the Offentlichkeit.