Shopping malls are often criticised as a cause of the privatisation of public space and the erosion of the public sphere. Some authors argue that to fight these negative processes, shopping malls should be considered equivalent to public spaces, and therefore entail the same rules enforced in public spaces (for instance, the right to free admission and to free speech). In our opinion these approaches are unsound. In this paper we argue that: 1) shopping malls do not necessarily entail a privatisation of public space, nor necessarily any erosion of the public sphere; 2) because they are not public spaces, they cannot be considered equivalent to them; 3) they are highly open access (compared to many other kinds of both private and public spaces), and the limits they impose on some political activities are, under certain conditions, acceptable. This does not mean that the owners of private spaces are completely free to act as they choose; it means that they cannot be equated with public entities that manage spaces that belong to the public.

Do malls contribute to the privatisation of public space and the erosion of the public sphere? Reconsidering the role of shopping centres / Chiodelli, F.; Moroni, S.. - In: CITY, CULTURE AND SOCIETY. - ISSN 1877-9166. - 6:1(2015), pp. 35-42. [10.1016/j.ccs.2014.12.002]

Do malls contribute to the privatisation of public space and the erosion of the public sphere? Reconsidering the role of shopping centres

Chiodelli F.;Moroni S.
2015

Abstract

Shopping malls are often criticised as a cause of the privatisation of public space and the erosion of the public sphere. Some authors argue that to fight these negative processes, shopping malls should be considered equivalent to public spaces, and therefore entail the same rules enforced in public spaces (for instance, the right to free admission and to free speech). In our opinion these approaches are unsound. In this paper we argue that: 1) shopping malls do not necessarily entail a privatisation of public space, nor necessarily any erosion of the public sphere; 2) because they are not public spaces, they cannot be considered equivalent to them; 3) they are highly open access (compared to many other kinds of both private and public spaces), and the limits they impose on some political activities are, under certain conditions, acceptable. This does not mean that the owners of private spaces are completely free to act as they choose; it means that they cannot be equated with public entities that manage spaces that belong to the public.
File in questo prodotto:
File Dimensione Formato  
2015_CCS_Shopping Malls.pdf

non disponibili

Tipologia: 2a Post-print versione editoriale / Version of Record
Licenza: Non Pubblico - Accesso privato/ristretto
Dimensione 245.56 kB
Formato Adobe PDF
245.56 kB Adobe PDF   Visualizza/Apri   Richiedi una copia
Pubblicazioni consigliate

Caricamento pubblicazioni consigliate

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11583/2951947