|
Getting your head around "The Medium is the Message" and the "Global Village". One of the biggest problems people have when they discuss the notion that "The Medium is the message" is that McLuhan has redefined "medium". Traditionally, we consider it a device by which we get information - a newspaper, television show, or so on. McLuhan argued that medium was ANY extension of our minds and bodies. So, for example, clothing is an extension of our skin, the house an extension of our body's heat-controlling abilities, and cars and bicycles an extension of our feet. The computer was an extension of our central nervous system. To add to the confusion, McLuhan also redefined "message". McLuhan felt that we should not just use the term to define content or information. By doing so, we miss the point that media's most significant feature is the power to change the course of human relations and activities. The message of a medium is any change in scale, pace or pattern that it causes in society. Change in degree and change in kind So, for example, cars cause a change in pace because we can get places quicker. They also cause a change in pattern (or "kind") because people could move away from the city. Because they could get places quicker, and at their own convenience, they did not have to live there. Therefore, the birth of the suburbs is due to the development of the car.
The "Global Village" Because of the speed at which technology transfers information, it's easier to send people or ideas much greater distances than ever before. Because of this, the sense of community - the people you can contact in a day- is much more far-reaching. For example, look at the phenomenon of e-mailing a teacher with a question on a Friday night. An e-mail will take seconds to get to your intended destination once you send it. If you had questions 50 years ago, it would have taken days to get a message to the teacher (no more than 20 kms away) and an equal time to get a reply. Instead, we could flip e-mails back and forth to friends around the globe inside of moments. Television allows us the ability to see things around the world that never would have been seen by us before. Sporting events, political decisions, and scientific breakthroughs, all available to you because of the box in your living room. The show you choose isn't a big deal. What IS a big deal is the fact that you, and millions (if not billions) of others could watch the same thing at roughly the same time, share the emotion of the event, yet none of you would have ever been able to experience it before TV. Consider this: fans of a sports team have something in common and can share the ups and downs of the team while never setting foot on the CONTINENT, let alone the country or city, the event took place in. in a few weeks, one of the big topics of discussion will be the result of the NFL playoff finals - the Super Bowl. Do you know people who will watch it? Definitely. Do you know anybody who will go to the game and see it in person? No chance! But by watching it on TV, even though we're in different places while we watch it, we have a common bond we can share. Now, transfer that idea to truly meaningful events in world history - the signing of a peace pact, walking on the Moon, September 11. Would you have been anywhere near as affected by 9/11 if you only read about it? I doubt it - the visuals were riveting and definitely moving. And you could share the reaction with all sorts of people, all over the world, through TV, the Internet, and any other technology that gets messages out to groups of people. Before TV, you would
have heard a radio report, which would not have been as effective. Before
Radio, you would have read about it in the paper, at best, the next day.
Instead, you might be one of the millions who actually saw the second
plane LIVE, as it happened. |