(Framework 4)
| Type of Space | 1. Official |
2. Quasi-Official |
3. Third Places |
4. Incidental |
5. Private |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Description | Designated as an official place and time to discuss issues. Public officials usually in charge |
Professionalization of citizen input. Leasdership clearly identified. Formal meetings and events are held. |
Rooted in daily life. Comfortable public gathering places where people choose to spend their free time. Usually no formal leader, but certain people are catalysts. |
Random, every-day encounters between friends and acquaintences (not in gathering places). |
Inside the home. |
| What usually happens | Can be divisive, partisan. Goal is usually to win for your side and, often, to cut down the other. Problem solving can be hard. |
Often productive but can slide into public meeting syndrome. Usually has a planned agenda. |
Not expressly political, but talk about common challenges is frequent. People talk informally to get information, understand their concerns and test ideas. Can lead to quasi-official spaces. |
People “visit,” tell stories, gossip, chitchat. Occasionally connect private concerns to community or public issues. A key information source for most citizens. |
Talk centers on the private life of the household. Public issues discussed in context of private concerns or beliefs. |
| Who’s involved | Public officials; organized interest groups; vocal citizens, often with an ax to grind. |
“Professional citizens;” officials often visit. |
Community catalysts; citizens who have something in common (neighborhood, ethnicity, parenthood, work ties). |
Immediate neighbors; people who already know each other. |
Family and close friends. |
| Wichita examples |
City council sessions, citizen planning organization meetings, “town meetings.” |
Neighborhood associations, civic groups, nonprofit grassroots organizations. |
Barbershops, churches, playgrounds, donut shops, bars, bookstores, cafés, recreation centers. |
Sidewalks, parks, front yards, front porches, backyard barbecues, phone calls, lunches at work. |
Kitchen table, living room, while reading the paper or watching the news. |
| Public perceptions |
People turned off by these spaces – seen as cynical, divisive, politics-as-usual. |
Seen as more authentic than regular “politics” – but few people are involved. Politically “active” citizens dominate. |
Savvy citizens and some civic leaders know these are key community spaces. Thriving third places are becoming rare in many neighborhoods; many citizens often are unaware of them. |
Much broader participation than first three layers. Not thought of as political, but as a natural part of life. |
Personal, private. |
| News media’s role. |
Already covered extensively. Good place to get the “official story” and opinions of organized interests. |
Reporters usually welcome. Those involved would like more comprehensive coverage of their work (but are sensitive to criticism). |
Reporters may enter and cover under certain conditions. Reporters need to be careful not to change the nature of the space. |
Dispersed, difficult to cover. Reporters need to be careful not to change the nature of the space. |
Can be covered in human interest stories – but intervening layers of public life are missing. |
READ THE NEXT SECTION — EXPLORING THE LAYERS OF CIVIC LIFE (PART 2) NEED TO MIGRATE FROM FTP