The purpose of this study is to examine users ́ opinions regarding the Swedish management of the covid-19 pandemic in two echo chambers, consisting of the comment fields in two ideologically different news pages on Facebook, Aftonbladet and Samtiden. Using a quantitative content analysis in different steps, the study will attempt to answer the following questions: - What opinions are expressed in two eco-chambers regarding the pandemic management in Sweden? -To what extent are these common or not between the echo chambers? The empirical material consists a total of 696 comments which will be analysed and compiled into a result. The result will then be set against two opposing theories, the theory of the Public Sphere and the theory of echo chambers, where these disagree upon whether the two different news pages lead to polarization. Depending on the outcome, the result can be said to be in agreement with one or both of the theories. The result of the study shows that the opinions of the users in the echo chambers are mainly the same which supports the theory of the Public Sphere and the idea of a need for a common consensus in order to maintain a functioning democracy. The opinions concern the subjects Sweden, the Swedish government, the Swedish state epidemiologist Anders Tegnell, the Restrictions and statistic rapports about the death toll in Sweden. The results provide information about the effects of echo chambers in an ongoing pandemic and the overall complexity around the definition of the term.

A critical investigation of the public/private distinction as it has been conceived in Anglo-American political thinking in the second half of the 20th century. A broadly held consensus has developed amongst many theorists that public/private does not refer to any single determinate distinction or relationship but rather to an often ambiguous range of related but analytically distinct conceptual oppositions. The argument of this thesis is that if we approach public/private in the search for analytic or conceptual clarity then this consensus is correct. Against this I propose that a number of the most dominant invocations of the distinction can be understood to express public/private as an irreducibly political dialectic that mediates the relationship between the subjective and objective side of social and political life. By locating these conceptually diverse invocations within a broader and more determinate framework of the historical development and contestation of the boundaries which establish the conditions for subjectivity, as the assertion of political agency, on the one hand, and which demarcate, police and defend these particular boundaries, as part of the objectively given character of social life and institutional organisation, on the other hand, then a more determinate character to public/private can be recognized. I then seek to explore the capacity of this model to capture and explain the peculiar post-war problematisation of public/private amongst a number of new left thinkers in Britain and America.