An End in Itself: McLuhan, Media, and the Innovation Aesthetic - Essay Example

An End in Itself: McLuhan, Media and the Innovation Aesthetic Can you think of any single message – or even many messages – ever transmitted by television that has had more effect on the daily lives of human beings than the advent of television itself? Gerald Stone & Michael Singletary Marshall McLuhan’s theories on mass media have for decades warned that it is important not to focus on the “trees” and lose sight of the “forest.” Nevertheless, this colloquial rendering of McLuhan’s basic theory accurately describes what has taken place in an era where the dizzying pace of change has placed everyone well within the technological “forest.” Consequently, as McLuhan contended, the message itself has become an afterthought. Social lines of demarcation, such as education and income, have been blurred by the widespread availability of devices that give everyone instant access to the same data. Yet, as the quote at the beginning of this paper indicates, emphasis is clearly on the medium at the expense of content. McLuhan’s fear was that this phenomenon would have a desensitizing effect on the ability of human beings to accurately and sensitively interpret content. This, McLuhan said, is a product of the false promise of innovation. Technological innovation was anathema to McLuhan, and it was because of this that he was determined that his groundbreaking work in (many would say his invention of) mass media theory not be mistaken for sanctioning. “I am resolutely opposed to all innovation...Many Name 2 people seem to think that if you talk about something recent, you’re in favour of it. The exact opposite is true in my case. Anything I talk about is almost certainly something I’m resolutely against” (Goyder, p. 251). McLuhan’s ethos was that media had changed society from the inside-out because it has changed the way in which human beings perceive the world. As a traditionalist/conservative, McLuhan, who had no substantial background in the technical or scientific fields, remained faithful to the “Western cultural legacy” in which he was steeped and which informed his views. This ethic holds that because human beings have become products of their media, our modes of perception have become unnatural. The fact that societies are shaped by media rather than by the content it delivers is a function of technology and, according to McLuhan and those who subscribe to his theories, this is not a desirable outcome. “Technology allows constant connectivity to our diversionary, mindless, celebrity-driven popular culture, offering soul-numbing content around the clock” (Staub, p. 15). Ultimately, McLuhan is concerned with perception, with how people perceive external stimuli. The prevalence of image-driven media obscures a more detailed assimilation of information, a process generally associated with the act of reading lines of text. It is the compromising of this cogitative functioning, what some might call “deep thinking,” that interested McLuhan. The opposing viewpoints held by McLuhan and media pioneer David Sarnoff illustrate the gist of the argument over whether media has a salutary or deleterious impact. Sarnoff argued that people are “too prone to make technological instruments the scapegoats for the sins of those who wield them,” a media version of the old “guns don’t kill, people do” line of Name 3 Reasoning (Griscom). McLuhan responded that this does not take into account the insidious nature of mass media, which has a tendency to “creep inside the participant unnoticed... ‘in the true Narcissus style, one is hypnotized...For any medium has the power of imposing its own assumption on the unwary.’” (Ibid). McLuhan argues that it is man’s “mutability” which lends media its particularly hypnotic power (Ibid). What is fascinating is that man’s technical innovations set in motion that remarkable process whereby man transforms himself. The advent of Internet technology, specifically the ways in which people interact with (and with each other inside) cyberspace has revolutionized the linear processing of information that began with the printed word. Now, the ingestion of data not only takes place on multiple levels, it comprises multiple senses. For many, this amounts to no less than the by-passing of “languages in favor of a general cosmic consciousness” (Elmer, p. 5). This is an intriguing concept that transcends the simple notion that “print is dead,” instead holding out the promise that the existence of cyberspace confers a form of immortality, not spiritual in the conventional sense but a virtual immortality in which human consciousness can exist perpetually, unfettered by conventional cognitive constraints. Proponents of this extension of virtual reality insist that this is the most important evolution in the history of the species; others, such as the dystopian philosopher Jacques Ellul, counter that the rampant and heedless faith in the advance of technology has brought to mankind an artificial imposition on the course of his destiny. According to Ellul, the “brave new world” enthusiasm of media and new media technology is driven by government or market forces that are specifically concerned with control and manipulation (p. 132). Ellul suggests Name 4 that the technological intrusion of government propaganda makes it seem as though that which is put forth is the people’s will. The lost truth is that once the message is crystallized, it becomes the people’s will (Ibid). For dystopians, like Ellul, the world of technology is at once a replacement of the natural world and a natural force unto itself. Thus, technology has a leveling effect on man as a social creature. Dystopians contend that technology has reached a point in our lives where man cannot act on technology, only within it (Elmer, p. 5). One reason man cannot effectively act upon the technological is the burden of data, the sheer volume of which makes it virtually impossible to extract information in a logical and productive manner. In this manner, technology wields a form of hypnosis that renders man virtually helpless. “It is not true that (man) can choose freely with regard to what is presented to him as the truth. And because rational propaganda thus creates an irrational situation, it remains, above all, propaganda – that is, an inner control over the individual by a social force, which...deprives him of himself” (Ellul, p. 84-87). Dystopianism accords with McLuhan’s concern over the futility of human beings trying to make sense of, and bring order out of, the rapid pace of technological advancement, a condition that he claimed must ultimately render humans quiescent. For McLuhan, technological innovation in the hands of agencies (those commercial and government interests to which Ellul referred) produces a virulent combination. “Once we have surrendered our senses and nervous systems to the private manipulation of those who would try to benefit from taking a lease on our eyes and ears and nerves, we don’t really have any rights left” (McLuhan, 1964). This is the breakneck pace of technological change that McLuhan feared would bring about the loss of individual identity. Name 5 We may well consider technological change within the context of innovation. When Apple and other companies, the names of which have become synonymous with innovation, introduce some new device, it is said to be in the interest of saving time, or placing a newer and more robust means of accessing data in the hands of the public; the speed with which information is made available through these new inventions never ceases to fascinate and entice the consumer, who finds himself constantly upgrading in order to keep pace with the latest developments. As such, and as McLuhan predicted, it is not the innovation, not the content made so readily available through the new version of the iPad or iPhone, for instance, but the alteration they bring about in the ways people interact. In this way, the populace is continually blinkered into participating in a kind of technological “beauty pageant.” The endless supply of new gadgetry fascinates people with the newest “toy” and they, in turn, become participants in a self-perpetuating trend. Where does it all end? McLuhan wrote that innovation for the sake of innovation is a matter of concern. Indeed, one cannot help but wonder when enough is enough. At what point will people have enough information in their hands? At what point does data come fast enough? “At what point is man going to recognize that this power of innovation may have to be restrained and that just as economically it may not be desirable to grow indefinitely...” (McLuhan, 1964). McLuhan goes on to note that ours is the first culture in world history to regard innovation for its own sake as a “friendly act” (Ibid). Innovation has altered the traditional ways in which people pursue their goals and the realization of career and life aspirations because the means of achieving these change every time technology “progresses” (Ibid). Name 6 This is so because humans now act and interact within a fully technologically based space. As such, more people than ever live their lives – communicate with friends, acquire degrees and look for jobs – in cyberspace. Indeed, people today may well find it difficult to further their personal agendas without having first established themselves on Facebook and LinkedIn, two of the most prominent networking sites. That this is so is indicative of the fact that people are increasingly trapped within a world defined by the medium, a space some refer to as “technostructure” (Elmer, p. 12). Within this technological dimension, people are compelled to conform to the dictates of an irresistibly adaptable reality. As McLuhan noted, media in the modern age has the effect of altering the entire landscape of human existence. Strictly speaking, it is no longer accurate to talk about the degree to which media technology is changing the world when, in a very real sense, it has become the world. In this reality one wonders whether, given its enormity, media can truly be considered “pervasive.” In truth, it is those who seek to conduct their affairs in contravention of the new technological paradigm that find themselves outside “the norm.” Such people are apt to find themselves labeled idiosyncratic, or quaint. Media precludes the possibility that we can choose how to interact because it determines how people communicate. This is the world that McLuhan warned of, a world in which the power of the media determines the course of human affairs rather than the reverse. Innovation, which gives media its idyllic aspect, serves as the carrot that people are only too willing to chase. The innovation aesthetic is the “wow” factor in the equation, the opiate that keeps human beings from noticing the enormity of the change that continues to take place. Name 7 Works Cited Ellul, Jacques. Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes. New York: Vintage Books, 1973. Elmer, Greg. Critical Perspectives on the Internet. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 2002. Goyder, John. Technology and Society: A Canadian Perspective. Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 2005. Griscom, Amanda. “Media.” Trends of Anarchy and Hierarchy: Comparing the Cultural Repercussions of Print and Digital Media. Web. http://cyberartsweb.org. McLuhan, Marshall. Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. New York: New American Library, 1964. Staub, Dick. The Culturally Savvy Christian: A Manifesto for Deepening Faith. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2008). Stone, Gerald, Singletary, Michael & Richmond, Virginia P. Clarifying Communication Theories: A Hands-On Approach. Ames, IA: Iowa State University Press, 1999. Read More