In education it is very important to
understand not just how technology works but how it affects us personally,
culturally, and economically. Marshall
McLuhan was a technological sociologist, and to many a bit of a prophet. The insights he made in the 1950’s through
the 1970’s completely changed the way we looked at media and its effects on our
culture. In 1967 he published a book
called The Medium is the Message: An
Inventory of Effects (1). McLuhan is well known for his cryptic yet
philosophical sayings, but what did he really mean by the medium is the message
and do his ideas still resonate today?
In order to understand and appreciate
McLuhan we must look at him within the historical context in which he
existed. He did not grow up in a time
with the internet. Rather he grew up
with the telephone, radio, and the advent of television. Through these earlier technologies he was
able to recognize not just how fast they were going to change, but how they were
going to change us.
So what is the meaning behind the media is
the message? In order to break down this statement I would like to compare it
to Green’s model (operational, cultural, and critical). First, operationally with the shift from
print material to video content our senses have also shifted from visual, to
auditory and kinesthetic (1). Reading is a purely visual activity. You actively use your eyes to scan and
understand the content. Although video
intuitively seems to be visual, McLuhan argues that the visual sense is much
more passive then with print. Instead
you are more involved hearing the content and feeling like you are part of
it. This shift in the senses is also
causing a shift from the left analytical hemisphere of the brain to the right
creative hemisphere of the brain (1).
The next comparison to Green’s model is
cultural. McLuhan calls this the “Global
Village” (1) and has written several books on this topic. Technology is breaking down boarders and
bringing us closer together. Through the
telephone, radio, and television, McLuhan was able to understand how we can now
communicate instantly, be brought right to the action, and have information transferred
at the speed of light. With the internet
this is truer than ever. Privacy is
going away at an alarming rate. Franklin
Roosevelt was able to get to become President without people knowing he had
polio. Now a politician’s image and
charisma on television is of the utmost importance (1). Religious, political, and personal views are
shared regularly via social media. The Global
Village is growing bigger every day.
Critically speaking McLuhan does not seem
to like where technology is taking us.
He much prefers a traditional life, but he does see the importance of
understanding these technologies, because like it or not they are here to stay
(1). It is more important than ever to
understand the consequences of our actions.
Being drawn so close to each other the effects of our actions are being
felt and criticized by the masses. Our
global community must find ways of working together or else we will destroy ourselves.
We are all responsible for our own actions
and understanding the media’s effects.
After all the media is merely a reflection of ourselves. It is not our ability to shape technology
that is important, it is our ability to understand how technology is shaping
us. This is what Marshall McLuhan meant
by the medium is the message, and this is why we must take responsibility for
ourselves and for our society by creating a better and more effective
educational system.
Reference
(1) McLuhan,
M. & Wolfe, T. (2013). Marshall McLuhan Speaks. Centennial 2011. Retrieved
from http://marshallmcluhanspeaks.com
Sean, as always, I appreciate your strong, analytic post. I especially appreciate that you focus on how McLuhan emphasizes our responsibility in shaping new environments; this is an aspect of McLuhan's critique on which people rarely focus. I do disagree, though, that technology is bring us closer together--unless you mean that we, individuals, are morphing into an us. I just do not see most web users as deeply engaged, and I am afraid that the web might be just as hot as other media. The interstices become ever widening gaps that no one is filling in.
ReplyDeleteCynical on Sunday,
Eileen
Eileen,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate the fresh perspective. I'm still wrapping my mind around some of McLuhan's ideas. Hot and cold as I understand it is the active or passive involvement with the media. A lot of that, especially with the internet, depends on how the user uses it as a tool. Scanning through a bunch of YouTube videos or posting what you are eating on Facebook would seem hot, while making your own video or participating on an open-source project would be much more involved and cold. There is a wide range of participation form the casual user, to people who spend more time in cyber space then out of it. Any advancement in communication is going to bring us closer together, for better or worse.
I am a little confused about the gap you speak of. Is it that the internet is creating more shallow connections between people? Or perhaps not controlling what we think, but what we think about. Striping away individual identity and giving way to mob mentalities? Please let me know if I missed the point.