The Implications of the Transformations in Communication Technology - Assignment Example

Approaches to Media Analysis Name: Institution: ESSAY PLAN QUESTION: 2. Discuss the differences between the following two approaches to media analysis that we have referred to in the unit (see Topics 2 and 6): the approach referred to as ‘technological determinism’, and the culturally based approach for understanding the relations between media technologies and cultural contexts and practices. In your discussion, weigh up the debate about the limits of technological determinism. Use examples from film and/or television to support your answer. INTRODUCTION: It is imperative that when conducting critical analyses of media and underlying technologies, the subjects are approached with a global view based on various philosophies and assumptions that shape people’s understanding and perceptions. However, conflicting philosophies and ideologies curtail progress towards consensus on the implications of the transformations in communication technology. The theme of this analytical paper revolves around the concept of technological determinism (TD) and social constructionism, which though conflicting discusses the relationship of technology and human behavior. Though TD in the contemporary society appears to greatly shape human behavior and culture, the humanism approach rivals the position and presents that technology is continually function of human norms and cultures. BODY: Understanding Technological Determinism Definition of TD Conceptual assumptions within TD Technological Determinism and Humanism Determism: Differences and Principles Social constructionist school of thought that considers cultural constructs as the basis for emergent technology The TD doctrines stem from Marshal McLuhan’s rationality that the message is the medium that enslaves the society to the power of technology Constellations of examples providing that the technology innovators and their technology do not determine what the technology is used for, rather it is the society and the prevailing culture Social constructionist concept lies on the fact that technology inventors often develop technologies that are unwanted r that even themselves do not conceptualize their application. Prevailing Problems and Debates There are challenges in interconnecting or divorcing social and ideological factors that cultivate technology and its inherent impact Debate ranges on about the social cultural influence on technology Technology is Socially and Culturally Situated The William’s humanist determinism and technological determinism Technology has ubiquitously surfaced as very critical; it is inevitably socially and culturally oriented Limits of Technological Determinism CONCLUSION Restatement of key arguments REFERENCES Approaches to Media Analysis Introduction It is imperative that when conducting critical analyses of media and underlying technologies, the subjects are approached with a global view based on various philosophies and assumptions that shape people’s understanding and perceptions. However, conflicting philosophies and ideologies curtail progress towards consensus on the implications of the transformations in communication technology. This premise implies that a number of technological and social concerns as regards media technologies should be recognized and their underpinning philosophical backgrounds explored. This should purposively help stem due respect for each emerging technology and the subsequent proceed cognizant of them; and promote finer conceptualization of their core arguments into an integrated holistic perspective that cultivates their complete understanding and their likely implications and social effects. The technological determinism theory anchors on the political economy and cultural philosophical traditions that predate the discussions of digital media technology (Adler & Borys, 1993). This essay explores and details the concepts of technological determinism in comparison with the social constructionist approach to unmask the principles underlying the social-cultural implications of the technology. Understanding Technological Determinism Technological determinism (TD) is an increasingly controversial philosophical and ideological concept coined by Adler and Borys (1993), which crowns media technology the onus of designing and structuring crucial social components: thinking, feelings, actions, and generally how the human society operates as it transits from one technological dispensation to another. According to Bijker, Hughes and Pinch (1987), it is imperative that people think, feel and act the way they do because of the information fed into them via the prevailing technology. For example, the radio requires people to listen and enhance their sense of hearing; and televisions on the other hand cultivates both the hearing and visual senses. The bottom line is that these technological innovations shape the subsequent human behavior in that upon interaction with them people transfer the developed senses into their routine lives and continually reuse the messages. The technological determinism discourse is founded on conceptual assumptions that often conflict the culturally structured human-technology relations. One of the primary elements of the TD is the assumption that humans do not have their free will at all. This ontological aspect of the discourse implies that people use whatever the whole society uses as a medium of communication to pass their information. The rationale in this context is that members of the society, owing to their lack of free will adapt to the prevailing medium of communication being used by the society to send and receive their messages. Important to note in this contextual presentation is that the TD approach bears an epistemological element, which has widely been exonerated by the contemporary trends in human-technology interactions and resulting behaviors. The recent technological transformations for instance have indicated that people change the way they communicate in tandem with alterations in the medium of communication. These premises as argued by Wajcman (2002) show that once the society accepts a technological change, all of its members act and feel the same as long as they continue utilizing the same medium. Therefore, TD theoretically hypothesizes that whenever technological systems and advanced, the culture or the society immediately develop senses that appropriate the use of the new means of sending and receiving messages. This theory however, delimits itself in the event that a new technology is unveiled and the society fails to note it or develop the necessary cues that would trigger emergence of senses that facilitate its consumption. Technological Determinism and Humanism Determism: Differences and Principles Although technology has been aforementioned as a critical determinant of societal norms as regards communication and behavior, these underlying canons are disputed by social constructionist school of thought that considers cultural constructs as the basis for emergent technology. The TD doctrines stem from Marshal McLuhan’s rationality that the message is the medium that enslaves the society to the power of technology, which ultimately dictates the prevailing way of life. However, this perspective is strongly contrasted by Raymond Williams who argued that it is rather the society that breeds technology. According to Wajcman (2002)), the social, cultural, economic, and institutional factors determine the choices based on which technologies are created and their eventual consumption. In this context Willims and Williams (2003), disputed McLuhan’s technology dictated societal norms as asocial and unhistorical. Contrary to TD’s assertions that technology shapes the society, there are constellations of examples providing that the technology innovators and their technology do not determine what the technology is used for, rather it is the society and the prevailing culture that direct technological use. For example, Wajcman (2002) cites the case of mobile/cell phone that was primarily developed for voice communication in which the creators of the technology hardly envisaged texting as a potential core application. In this context, text messaging resulted from adoption by young people that customized the new technology to suit their economic and social factors. User determinism is also exemplified by the 1990s introduction of wireless application protocol that remained redundant until 2000 when market uptake occurred. These examples chronicle the societal influence on which technology is used and the forms in which it is consumed. Another ground on which the TD approach differs from the social constructionist concept lies on the fact that technology inventors often develop technologies that are unwanted r that even themselves do not conceptualize their application. For example, the graphical user interface (icons, menus) were invented as smart technology ideas but remained unpopular with negligible impact on the society until Steve Job’s Apple Company figured out their applications. Willims and Williams (2003) fault McLuhan’s TD through contentions that some technologies are accidental or driven by individualistic rather than non-commercial motives. This argument is evinced by an invention by researchers at Cambridge University that developed the Webcam purposively to aid staff remain aware of the status at the department’s coffee percolator. Additionally, the invention of the Modem at Chicago to initiate an easy way for students to send files over the phone and avoid travelling during windy winter was equally an accidental technology that did not immediately influence the behavior of the human society. However, the social constructionist examples laid above cannot be generalized to imply that technology prevails passively in the ream of human behavior and the ultimate culture. This is because without particular technologies, some social norms could not develop. Jordan(2008) argues that different kinds of human actions are made harder or simplified by varying technology-human interaction. For example, the invention of telephone facilitated easy passage and receipt of messages, a form of human interaction that was unimagined before the discovery. Additionally, the social constructionist claims that technology is dependent on human culture and that some technologies were accidental and improved for foreseen uses and integrated into known practices are challengeable. This is because William’s theoretical stances in the social constructionism deprived technology of principle plausibility as regards the technological determinism (Jordan, 2008). Prevailing Problems and Debates In addition to debating the real source of technology, there are challenges in interconnecting or divorcing social and ideological factors that cultivate technology and its inherent impact. It is imperative that every form of TD bears part that the difference between an invention and its preceding forms, although locating the social component that TD seeks to justify can be extremely difficult. Although proponents of TD cite capitalism as a core stimulant of technological transformation, preserving this perspective must be precluded by strong rejection of the social constructionist presentation. Moreover, although social constructionist has strongly featured plausible explanations as regards the overall direction of technological development, it is difficult to show the constellation of social forces that dictate the direction of a specific technology. According to Ellul (1964), although the debate ranges on about the social cultural influence on technology, the effect of any technology is a function of the prevailing social contexts. This is because the social situations allow or dissuade the adoption of the invention, and if the technology is adopted, the social situation will greatly determine the extent of its consumption and its eventual impact. It is difficult to uphold strong versions of TD at the glare of the substantial evidence that the social context underlies overall influence equally as it is to disapprove of the causal impact instigated by technology. Technology is Socially and Culturally Situated The William’s humanist determinism and technological determinism offer comprehensible insights into the controversy that continually surround the technology-human society relationships. This implies that both theories should be considered because reality is apparently a combination of influences. According to (Willims and Williams, 2003), a historical perspective reflects a complex and interconnected mannerisms of operability between technological inventions and social cultural practices. Jordan (2008)) environmental or social changes can manifest in a robust manner due to some technological or social forces and ideas. The understanding of the sophisticated and multi-faceted influences around which technological and social practices revolve can be discerned from cultural technologies, which underlines the technology, contextual content, the social knowledge and the power relations. Worthy noting is that though technology has ubiquitously surfaced as very critical, it is inevitably socially and culturally oriented. Slack and Wise (2005) argues the double directional context of technology in that its invention may precede human expectations and use, and can at times follow in response to the human expectations and needs. This is to imply that sometime technology shapes social and cultural frames, and is as well appropriated by humans for their own purposes that may differ from those of the inventors. The power relations between technologies and their consumers are two way implying that they should be considered mutually independent. This is to connote that without the ultimate consumers any technology would not only be redundant but also useless, and that without technological inventions human lack extensions of their abilities invigorated by technology (Slack and Wise, 2005). It is thus reasonable to summarize that technology and human society are mutually interdependent that interact and influence each other in a reciprocal determinism. Limits of Technological Determinism The main problem of TD is that it exclusively deprives human of the space to make choices and interventions, and prevents people from responsibility for the technological inventions they make. Additionally, TD is to blame for arguments that it promotes denial of responsibility by the people that create a particular technology, and the choices they make either individually or collectively, which precipitates provocation of the social entities that appear to challenge the pace and direction of technological change. A lack of certainty about the conventional meaning of TD precipitates debates about whether it reliably explains the historical happenings. This lack of clarity about the meaning of TD is largely fueled by its utter disagreements as presented by social and technology historical researchers. The limits of TD feature prominently in discussions about technology and monumental changes where the concept is invoked. This implies that until the social and scientific realms are able to ascertain what precisely the discourse means, it is unlikely that the concerns of whether the concept is useful for interpreting and forecasting history or not. According to Slack and Wise (2005), the first limit of TD lies on the interpretation that the concept is probably the least specific and precise. This is because TD interpretations hinge on human attitudes for determining and explaining the theoretical influence of technology. This context is anchored on the general portrayal of the concept as human enterprises through which people that create and deploy technology and driven be judgments on goals about public and private goods. The Logic of Innovation and Technological Change The contemporary circulation of media content via myriad of technology systems is hugely a function of consumer participation. This argument underscores common connotations that the convergence instigated by digitization has been solely a product of technological processes amalgamating different media functions within same devices. Rather, the convergence represents a cultural transition as users are encouraged to search for new information and interlink the dispersed media content. Conclusion This essay detailed and examined the discourse of technological determinism viewed in comparison with the culture based accounts of the sources of technology and the underlying influence on people. The principle of technological determinism is underplayed by the theoretical observation that the technology shapes human’s behaviors and subsequent cultures. On the contrary, the social-cultural account presents that the society actually determines technology. It is imperative that when conducting critical analyses of media and underlying technologies, the subjects are approached with a global view based on various philosophies and assumptions that shape people’s understanding and perceptions. it is imperative that people think, feel and act the way they do because of the information fed into them via the prevailing technology. Although technology has been aforementioned as a critical determinant of societal norms as regards communication and behavior, these underlying canons are disputed by social constructionist school of thought that considers cultural constructs as the basis for emergent technology. The social, cultural, economic, and institutional factors determine the choices based on which technologies are created and their eventual consumption. In addition to debating the real source of technology, there are challenges in interconnecting or divorcing social and ideological factors that cultivate technology and its inherent impact. The contemporary circulation of media content via myriad of technology systems is hugely a function of consumer participation. References Adler, P.S., & Borys, B. (1993). Materialism and idealism in organizational theory. Organization Studies, 14(5), 657-679. Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P., & Pinch, T. (1987). The social construction of technological systems. CAMBRIDGE, MA: MIT Press. Ellul, J. (1964). The technological society. New York: Random House. Jordan, T. (2008). Hacking: Digital media technological determinism. New York, NY: Polity. McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extensions of man. New York: McGraw-Hill . Slack, J.D., & Wise, J.M. (2005). Culture plus technology: A primer. (3rd ed.). New York: Peter Lang. Wajcman, J. (2002). Addressing technological change: The challenge to social theory, Current Sociology, 50, 3: 347-363. Williams, R., & Williams, E. (2003). Television: Technology and cultural form. (3rd ed.) London, Routledge. Read More

One of the primary elements of the TD is the assumption that humans do not have their free will at all. This ontological aspect of the discourse implies that people use whatever the whole society uses as a medium of communication to pass their information. The rationale in this context is that members of the society, owing to their lack of free will adapt to the prevailing medium of communication being used by the society to send and receive their messages. Important to note in this contextual presentation is that the TD approach bears an epistemological element, which has widely been exonerated by the contemporary trends in human-technology interactions and resulting behaviors.

The recent technological transformations for instance have indicated that people change the way they communicate in tandem with alterations in the medium of communication. These premises as argued by Wajcman (2002) show that once the society accepts a technological change, all of its members act and feel the same as long as they continue utilizing the same medium. Therefore, TD theoretically hypothesizes that whenever technological systems and advanced, the culture or the society immediately develop senses that appropriate the use of the new means of sending and receiving messages.

This theory however, delimits itself in the event that a new technology is unveiled and the society fails to note it or develop the necessary cues that would trigger emergence of senses that facilitate its consumption. Technological Determinism and Humanism Determism: Differences and Principles Although technology has been aforementioned as a critical determinant of societal norms as regards communication and behavior, these underlying canons are disputed by social constructionist school of thought that considers cultural constructs as the basis for emergent technology.

The TD doctrines stem from Marshal McLuhan’s rationality that the message is the medium that enslaves the society to the power of technology, which ultimately dictates the prevailing way of life. However, this perspective is strongly contrasted by Raymond Williams who argued that it is rather the society that breeds technology. According to Wajcman (2002)), the social, cultural, economic, and institutional factors determine the choices based on which technologies are created and their eventual consumption.

In this context Willims and Williams (2003), disputed McLuhan’s technology dictated societal norms as asocial and unhistorical. Contrary to TD’s assertions that technology shapes the society, there are constellations of examples providing that the technology innovators and their technology do not determine what the technology is used for, rather it is the society and the prevailing culture that direct technological use. For example, Wajcman (2002) cites the case of mobile/cell phone that was primarily developed for voice communication in which the creators of the technology hardly envisaged texting as a potential core application.

In this context, text messaging resulted from adoption by young people that customized the new technology to suit their economic and social factors. User determinism is also exemplified by the 1990s introduction of wireless application protocol that remained redundant until 2000 when market uptake occurred. These examples chronicle the societal influence on which technology is used and the forms in which it is consumed. Another ground on which the TD approach differs from the social constructionist concept lies on the fact that technology inventors often develop technologies that are unwanted r that even themselves do not conceptualize their application.

For example, the graphical user interface (icons, menus) were invented as smart technology ideas but remained unpopular with negligible impact on the society until Steve Job’s Apple Company figured out their applications. Willims and Williams (2003) fault McLuhan’s TD through contentions that some technologies are accidental or driven by individualistic rather than non-commercial motives.

Read More