Global Journal of Human Social Science, C: Sociology and Culture, Volume 23 Issue 4

II. C ommunicative C ity as C ommunication N etworks Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution in the 19th century, urbanization has brought convenience, but also caused serious urban diseases. Among these urban diseases, communication scholars have keenly captured the "uncommunicable" urban disease, that is, the extensive coverage of seemingly new social interconnection technology and intelligent perception technology has greatly improved the current situation of urban communication (Allison, 2008). However, from the loneliness and strangeness of individuals in the city to the cluster of urban contradictions, the urban disease is a fact that connection is more importance than communication. Therefore, communication researchers propose that the first thing to be solved in the process of promoting urbanization is the value of the city, that is, the "communicative city" as a communication network (Carpentier, 2008). Firstly, communicative city is a kind of urban interactive network based on the concept of "network". Understanding the city from the perspective of communication network means taking the intensive interaction between people and the city as the nature of the city. This network includes three aspects: geographical network connected by urban material and capital through media, social network constructed by interpersonal interaction and coordination, and cultural sharing and identification network realized through symbolic symbols. Furthermore, since complex networks are characterized by emergence, dynamics and self-organization, communicative city resorts to the concept of "complexity" to interpret the dynamic change, reorganization and connection of urban communication networks (Gumpert & Drucker, 2008). In this sense, the urban communication network has the characteristics of what Castells called "space of flow ", that is, the social consensus space without regional proximity, and the media network constructed by social relations and communication technology is in the process of changing and reconnecting (Castells, 2020). Secondly, communicative city has different evaluation indexes. A study on communicative city by German scholar Kunzmann(1997: 28) put forward the normative concept, he believes that communicative city stresses the role of information communication technologies (ICTs) in city construction, protecting citizens' urban rights from information provision and participation opportunities, creating local identity, civic pride, and civic participation. Kuntzmann's definition emphasizes the social and political dimension of ICTs. The former meets the information and connection needs of citizens' discussion through communication technology, while the latter connects communication with politics, aiming to meet people's needs for political participation. Carpentier (2008), a European communication scholar, also believes that different from the concept of "information city" proposed by Castells, the communicative city has more political implications, namely the ability of citizens to actively participate in and influence urban policies and the ability of cross-regional information flow. He explains the role of alternative media organizations in shaping communicable cities. As a kind of local media hidden in the community and ignored by the mainstream urban culture, compared with the mainstream media, it is more capable of organizing mobilization and media empowerment. Therefore, communicative city should embrace the local "alternative media" and increase the communicable features of openness, respect and inclusiveness. In the view of American communication scholar Jeffres (2010), every community has a communication system. The concept of "communicative city" helps to arouse people's attention on the communication mode that connects people in the city and the relationship between city and communication. It will also help those who plan, design and manage cities to recognize the impact of their activities on communication and how communication in turn affects civil society and sustainable urban development. Specifically, the features of communicative city include six aspects: urban communication mode promotes community attachment; communication connects citizens of different backgrounds; communication tools, models, and policies that help the most vulnerable members; communication mode supports and stimulates the economic activity of the city; communication systems support community culture; communication patterns help perpetuate community traditions. Drucker & Gumpert (2018) argue that the starting point of urban communication research is that cities are places and products of communication. The communicative city is a moral and idealized concept that shows the urban landscape as it should be. Three seminars on Communicable cities held in 2007-2008 reached a consensus on the characteristics of communicable cities, which are divided into three typical clusters: one is social interaction, with a wide range of places and opportunities for social interaction; Second, infrastructure, the city has a good information communication network; The third is civil society, with strong opportunities for civic participation and political venues. The Communicative City Index has even been created to be incorporated into the urban public policy agenda to encourage cities to provide healthy communication environments (Drucker & Gumpert, 2020). In general, previous studies have conducted preliminary exploration around communicable cities, mainly focusing on two types of urban public spaces, namely urban public places and urban public media. Firstly, through the exploration of urban public interaction places, the purpose is to explore how the physical space establishes a wide connection between © 2023 Global Journals Volume XXIII Issue IV Version I 2 ( ) Global Journal of Human Social Science - Year 2023 C Towards a Communicative City: Applying a New Framework for Understanding Communication and City