Context of Practice - Williams Vs Mcluhan

Mcluhan, M. Selected Material from Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, in Giddings, S. and Lister, M. (eds.) (2011) The New Media and Technocultures Reade, London and New York, Routledge, Pages 82-91

Williams, R. The Technology and the Society, in Giddings, S. and Lister, M. (eds.) (2011) The New Media and Technocultures Reade, London and New York, Routledge, Pages 92-104

Both texts when compared share huge similarities and distinct differences about their concerns with technology, media and the way they intertwine to influence each other. As they both share matters that have reasoning behind them we need to reach a conclusion onto whose’ ideas are more feasible, to do this we will research a little closer into each text.

Firstly Mcluhan’s text begins with technology and explaining how the media has contributed to changes it has occurred over time. He states “the relationships between technology, culture and society are seen as dismissive of other economic, historical and social determines.” (1) Looking at this statement he is arguing that there actually is no connection between culture, technology and society in terms of historical, economical and social discussions. He then goes on to explain that ‘media technologies should be understood as ‘extensions of man’. (2) ‘These have been extensions of the body senses: they eye, the skin, the hand, and the foot’ (3) Proclaim that ‘the nature of the medium through which people communicate which shapes a given society and not the particular message it carries’. (4) A firm example would be if you were planning on quitting your job, your boss would want to it hear it in person rather than another type of communication.

On the other hand, if we look at William’s text in comparison it becomes obvious that his view is completely different when it comes to technology and the influence it has received. William’s states ‘whatever form any particular developing media technology may take, there is for him nothing in the technology to make this inevitable’. (5) It’s difficult see what point he’s a attempting to make in the first section of the text, he argues there is nothing in technology making it inevitable but he hasn’t even explained what the inevitability is yet. This isn’t made clear till further in the text, he goes on to say ‘technological devices or systems are not the inevitable result of either clear consumer demand or their own inherent logic’. (6) At this point we are starting to grasp exactly what he is talking about, whether it is media or the consumer that has driven technology to what it is today.

At this point Williams really starts dwell about his argument, present a point specifically about television. It was a given that change was imminent when the TV was invented and Williams is basically arguing that life would be quite different however he strangely questions what he just stated. Are we the way we are because of technology or have we made it this way because of just who we are already.

Now comparing the two together, they both present impressive arguments that compliment their field of expertise but if one was chosen to make the most sense it would be William. He makes obvious links between society, media and technology. He also explains it in real world application aswell, on page 94, line 1-31 he makes a clear statement on how technology has affected us. Points 1-5 says ‘beyond the development of technology there is no reason why any particular invention should have come about’ (7) implying that ‘if television had not been invented, this argument would run, certain definite social and cultural event would not have occurred.’ (8) In the second half namely points 6-9 ‘if television had not been invented, this argument runs, we would still be manipulate or mindlessly entertained, but in some other way and perhaps less powerfully.’ (9) Finally the views can be taken either way ‘it is either a self-acting force which creates new way of life, or it is a self-acting force, which provides materials for new ways of life’ (10) but in the end what they both have in common is that ‘television has altered our world.’ (11)

Reference Points

1. Page 82, Line 01
2. Page 82, Line 11
3. Page 82, Line 12
4. Page 82, Line 20
5. Page 92, Line 04
6. Page 92, Line 10
7. Page 94, Line 36
8. Page 94, Line 39
9. Page 94, Line 43
10. Page 95, Line 28
11. Page 95, Line 01