Cover not available
Article published In:
Journal of Language and Politics
Vol. 20:4 (2021) ► pp.539–562

Informing the government or fostering public debate?

How Chinese discussion forums open up spaces for deliberation

ORCID logo | Zhejiang University
 | University of Leeds
 | University of Groningen
This article focuses on a popular form of civic practice in China: casual political talk that occurs in online spaces that are not ostensibly political. We investigate how Chinese citizens engage in politics through a comparative analysis of everyday talk on health issues across three popular online discussion forums: a government-orientated forum (Qiangguo Luntan), a commercial-lifestyle forum (Tieba), and a commercial-topical forum focused on parental advice (Yaolan). Our findings show that conventional deliberation directly involving conflictual and resistant attitude against state authorities is not prominently embraced by Chinese citizens in everyday online settings. However, communal and less confrontational forms of discourse are important for the proto-political talk to turn political, thus serving as prerequisite conditions for the emergence of an online public sphere. We argue that to explain how the public sphere emerges in everyday (non-political) spaces in China, it is essential to take communal discursive forms into account.
Keywords: political talk, online deliberation, public sphere, China, online forums, public healthcare politics
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The position of the public in healthcare governance
  • 3.The Chinese internet and the public sphere
  • 4.Online spaces and everyday political talk in China
  • 5.Research focus and method
    • 5.1Three cases
    • 5.2Sampling
    • 5.3Content analysis
  • 6.Findings
    • 6.1Normative conditions of deliberation
    • 6.2Social-civic communicative practices
  • 7.Discussion
  • 8.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • Bibliography
Published online: 16 June 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jlp.19104.sun
References (54)
Bibliography
Balla, Steven J. 2014. “Health System Reform and Political Participation on the Chinese Internet.” China Information 28(2): 214–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bennett, W. Lance, and Alexandra Segerberg. 2012. “The Logic of Connective Action: Digital Media and the Personalization of Contentious Politics.” Information, Communication & Society 15(5): 739–768. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
CNNIC. 2017. “The 40th Statistical Report on Internet Development in China.” Accessed December 28, 2017. [URL]
Coleman, Stephen. 2007. “Mediated Politics and Everyday Life.” International Journal of Communication 1(1): 49–60.Google Scholar
Coleman, Stephen, and Giles Moss. 2012. “Under Construction: The Field of Online Deliberation Research.” Journal of Information Technology and Politics 9(1):1–15. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Conover, Pamela Johnston, and Donald D. Searing. 2005. “Studying ‘Everyday Political Talk’ in the Deliberative System.” Acta Politica 40(3): 269–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Damm, Jens. 2007. “The Internet and the Fragmentation of Chinese Society.” Critical Asian Studies 39(2): 273–294. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dahlberg, Lincoln. 2004a. “Net-public sphere research: Beyond the ‘first phase’.” Javnost – The Public 11(1): 27–43. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2004b. “The Habermasian Public Sphere: A Specification of the Idealized Conditions of Democratic Communication.” Studies in Social and Political Thought 10(10): 2–18.Google Scholar
Friess, Dennis, and Christiane Eilders. 2015. “A Systematic Review of Online Deliberation Research.” Policy & Internet 7(3): 319–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gleiss, Marielle Stigum. 2015. “Speaking Up for the Suffering (Br)other: Weibo Activism, Discursive Struggles, and Minimal Politics in China.” Media, Culture & Society 37(4): 513–529. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graham, Todd. 2008. “Needles in a haystack: A New Approach for Identifying and Assessing Political Talk in Nonpolitical Discussion Forums.” Javnost-the Public 15(2): 17–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2009. What’s Wife Swap Got to Do with It?: Talking Politics in the Net-Based Public Sphere. PhD diss., Universiteit Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Graham, Todd, and Scott Wright. 2014. “Discursive Equality and Everyday Talk Online: The Impact of “Superparticipants”.” Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 19 (3): 625–642. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Graham, Todd. 2015. “Everyday political talk in the Internet-based public sphere.” In Handbook of digital politics, edited by Stephen Coleman and Deen Freelon, 247–263. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.Google Scholar
Graham, Todd, Daniel Jackson, and Scott Wright. 2015. “From Everyday Conversation to Political Action: Talking Austerity in Online ‘Third Spaces’.” European Journal of Communication 30 (6): 648–665. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2016. “‘We Need to Get Together and Make Ourselves Heard’: Everyday Online Spaces as Incubators of Political Action.” Information, Communication & Society 19 (10): 1373–1389. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 1984. The Theory of Communicative Action (trans. Thomas McCarthy). Vol. 1, Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
. 1987. Theory of Communicative Action (trans. Thomas McCarthy). Vol. 2, Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
. 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society (trans. Thomas Burger). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
. 1996. Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy (trans. William Rehg). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Han, Rongbin. 2015a. “Defending the Authoritarian Regime Online: China’s “Voluntary Fifty-Cent Army”.” The China Quarterly 2241: 1006–1025. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2015b. “Manufacturing Consent in Cyberspace: China’s’ Fifty-Cent Army’.” Journal of Current Chinese Affairs 44(2): 105–134. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
He, Baogang. 2014. “Deliberative Culture and Politics: The Persistence of Authoritarian Deliberation in China.” Political Theory 42(1): 58–81. [URL]
Jiang, Min. 2010. “Authoritarian Deliberation on Chinese Internet.” Electronic Journal of Communication 20(3&4): 7–39.Google Scholar
Kornreich, Yoel, Ilan Vertinsky, and Pitman B. Potter. 2012. “Consultation and Deliberation in China: The Making of China’s Health-Care Reform.” China Journal 68(2): 176–203. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kalathil, Shanthi, and Taylor C. Boas. 2003. Open Networks, Closed Regimes: The Impact of the Internet on Authoritarian Rule. Washington, DC: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Jennifer Pan, and Margaret E. Roberts. 2013. “How Censorship in China Allows Government Criticism but Silences Collective Expression.” American Political Science Review 107(2): 326–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kim, Joohan, and Eun Joo Kim. 2008. “Theorizing Dialogic Deliberation: Everyday Political Talk as Communicative Action and Dialogue.” Communication Theory 18(1): 51–70. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kligler-Vilenchik, Neta. 2015. “From wizards and house-elves to real-world issues: Political talk in fan spaces.” International Journal of Communication 91: 2027–2046.Google Scholar
Lewis, Orion A. 2013. “Net Inclusion: New Media’s Impact on Deliberative Politics in China.” Journal of Contemporary Asia 43(4): 678–708. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, Yuanli. 2009. “Reforming China’s Health Care: for the People, by the People?” The Lancet 373(9660): 281–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Liu, Jun. 2017. “From ‘Moments of Madness’ to ‘the Politics of Mundanity’-Researching Digital Media and Contentious Collective Actions in China.” Social Movement Studies 16(4): 418–432. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MacKinnon, Rebecca. 2011. “China’s” Networked Authoritarianism”.” Journal of Democracy 22(2): 32–46. Project MUSE. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mansbridge, Jane. 1999. “Everyday Talk in the Deliberative System.” In Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement, ed. Stephen Macedo, 211–239. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mayring, Philipp. 2000. “Qualitative Content Analysis.” Forum: Qualitative Social Research 1(2).Google Scholar
Marques, Ângela CS, and Rousiley CM Maia. 2010. “Everyday Conversation in the Deliberative Process: An Analysis of Communicative Exchanges in Discussion Groups and Their Contributions to Civic and Political Socialization.” Journal of Communication 60(4): 611–635. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Medaglia, Rony, & Yang, Yang. 2017. Online Public Deliberation in China: Evolution of Interaction Patterns and Network Homophily in the Tianya Discussion Forum. Information, Communication & Society 20(5): 733–753. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Papacharissi, Zizi. 2010. A private sphere: Democracy in a digital age. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Ramesh, M., Xun Wu, and Alex Jingwei He. 2013. “Health Governance and Healthcare Reforms in China.” Health policy and planning 29(6): 663–672. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schlæger, Jesper, and Min Jiang. 2014. “Official Microblogging and Social Management by Local Governments in China.” China Information 28(2): 189–213. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stromer-Galley, Jennifer. 2007. “Measuring Deliberation’s Content: A Coding Scheme.” Journal of public deliberation 3(1): 12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sun, Yu, Todd Graham, and Marcel Broersma. 2018. “Environmental Talk in the Chinese Green Public Sphere: A Comparative Analysis of Daily Green-Speak across Three Chinese Online Forums.” In Managing Democracy in the Digital Age, edited by Julia Schwanholz, Todd Graham and Peter-Tobias Stoll, 243–263. Cham: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Tai, Zixue. 2006. The Internet in China: Cyberspace and Civil Society. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Teets, Jessica C. 2014. Civil Society under Authoritarianism. New York: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wyatt, Robert O., Elihu Katz, and Joohan Kim. 2000. “Bridging the Spheres: Political and Personal Conversation in Public and Private Spaces.” Journal of Communication 50(1):71–92. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wright, Scott. 2012. “From “Third Place” to “Third Space”: Everyday Political Talk in Non-Political Online Spaces.” Javnost-The public, 19(3): 5–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2018. “The Impact of ‘Super-Participants’ on Everyday Political Talk.” Journal of Language and Politics 17(2): 155–172. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wright, Scott, Todd Graham, and Dan Jackson. 2015. “Third Space, Social Media, and Everyday Political Talk.” In The Routledge Companion to Social Media and Politics, edited by Axel Bruns, Gunn Enli, Eli Skogerbo, Anders Olof Larsson, and Christian Christensen, 74–88. New York: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yang, Guobin. 2009. The power of the Internet in China: Citizen activism online. Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
. 2003. “The Co-Evolution of the Internet and Civil Society in China.” Asian Survey 43(3): 405–422. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
. 2007. “How Do Chinese Civic Associations Respond to the Internet?” The China Quarterly 189(1): 122–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zheng, Yongnian, and Guoguang Wu. 2005. “Information Technology, Public Sphere, and Collective Action in China.” Comparative Political Studies 38(5): 507–536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zhang, Weiyu. 2010. “Technical Capital and Participatory Inequality in eDeliberation” Information, Communication & Society 13(7): 1019–1039. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Sun, Yu & Scott Wright
2024. Relay activism and the flows of contentious publicness on WeChat: a case study of COVID-19 in China. Information, Communication & Society 27:2 ► pp. 257 ff. DOI logo
He, Kun, Scott A Eldridge & Marcel Broersma
2023. The discursive logics of online populism: social media as a “pressure valve” of public debate in China. Journal of Information Technology & Politics ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
He, Kun, Scott A. Eldridge & Marcel Broersma
2023. Who are the people? Populists’ articulation of “the people” in contemporary China. Chinese Journal of Communication 16:3 ► pp. 267 ff. DOI logo
Peng, Altman Yuzhu & Nicole Talmacs
2023. Jacinda Ardern and the limits of gender on the Chinese-language Internet: a critical discourse analysis. Feminist Media Studies 23:6 ► pp. 2780 ff. DOI logo
Stead, Victoria & Kirstie Petrou
2023. Beyond the 'Triple Win': Pacific Islander farmworkers' use of social media to navigate labour mobility costs and possibilities through the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 49:9 ► pp. 2194 ff. DOI logo
Yu, Zizheng & Nairui Xu
2023. The emergence of “consumer sphere”: the logics behind short video activism tactics of Chinese consumers. Media Asia 50:2 ► pp. 204 ff. DOI logo
Sun, Yu, Todd Graham & Marcel Broersma
2022. Complaining and sharing personal concerns as political acts: how everyday talk about childcare and parenting on online forums increases public deliberation and civic engagement in China. Journal of Information Technology & Politics 19:2 ► pp. 214 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 9 january 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.