'the transformation of the parliament's function brings the dubiousness of publicity as the organizational principle of the stare order into full view. from a critical principle wielded by the public, publicity has been transformed into a principle of managed integration (wielded by staging agencies--the administration, special-interest groups, and above all the parties). a consumer culture's distortion of publicity in the judicial realm matches the plebiscitary distortion of parliamentary publicity. for the trials in criminal court that are interesting enough to be documented and hawked by the mass media reverse the critical principle of publicity in an analogous manner; instead of serving the control of the jurisdictional process by the assembled citizens of the state, publicity increasingly serves the packaging of court proceedings for the mass culture of assembled consumers.
--next paragraph, somewhat down--
'to be sure proceedings are to continue to be open to the public; what is to be avoided is turning parliamentary documentation of internally haggled out resolutions into party grandstanding or criminal trials into show trials for the entertainment of consumers who, strictly speaking, are indifferent. the argument is directed against the plebiscitary deviations from the liberal model. typical for this purpose is the distinction between public sphere and publicity...'