Media, Technology and Society

Williams’ argues that the development of program content of colour television was altered because programmers wished to make the most of their ability to use colour and so they ‘looked for particularly ‘colourful’ subjects and ideas to exploit this technical development’ (Giddings and Lister, 2011, p. 92). However, the invention of colour television did not simply create new television series, as there are other factors involved such as audience opinion and different budget allowances. Although Williams (2011, p. 93) also argues that ‘in a significant way this technology did have an effect in its facilitation, suggestion even, of new programme content, aesthetics and modes of presentation.’ Therefore it can be seen that the introduction of new technologies was a significant factor in the development of new shows.

McLuhan’s view of ‘media as constituting an environment’ (Giddings and Lister, 2011, p. 83) is supported by contemporary media theories such as the idea of media ecologies. McLuhan also argues that we have become inherently reliant on this ‘media environment’ for our everyday survival. ‘These technologies surround us. They become naturalised as an environment that we inhabit or, in McLuhan’s phrase, they become like water to fish, imperceptible but essential to survival.’ This quote shows how in today’s society we have become dependent on technology to survive. He goes on to say ‘we have extended our central nervous system itself in a global embrace’ (Giddings and Lister, 2011, p. 83). This view directly contrasts Williams’ argument who believes that there are other factors involved.

Williams’ main argument is that there are other factors which influence the relationship between technology, society and culture such as economic, historical and social factors. The invention of television itself depended on the development new technologies ‘in electricity, telegraphy, photography and motion pictures, and radio’ (Giddings and Lister, 2011, p. 96). After many years of technological development in 1925 John Logie Baird showed the first operational television. It was due to new technologies developed during the creation of the television, such as advances in electric power that were also useful to other industries such as ‘city and house lighting’ (Giddings and Lister, 2011, p. 96).

However Williams’ makes the point that sometimes society’s need for a certain technology can be held back by the lack of ‘appropriate technology...partly because some real needs, in any particular period are beyond the scope of existing or foreseeable scientific and technical knowledge’ (Giddings and Lister, 2011, p. 98). Although society wants, technology won’t always give.

McLuhan’s main argument is that medium is the message ‘this is merely to say that the personal and social consequences of any medium —that is, of any extension of ourselves —result from the new scale that is introduced into our affairs by each extension of ourselves, or by any new technology’ (Giddings and Lister, 2011, p. 84). He explains his point using the railway.  

‘For the “message” of any medium or technology is the change of scale or pace or pattern that it introduces into human affairs. The railway did not introduce movement or transportation or wheel or road into human society, but it accelerated and enlarged the scale of previous human functions, creating totally new kinds of cities and new kinds of leisure.’ (Giddings and Lister, 2011, p. 85)

‘The new technologies are invented as it were in an independent sphere, and then create new societies or new human conditions’ (Giddings and Lister, 2011, p. 95). This shows that society is not fully dependent on technology but that it can alter how society and mankind function. Whereas Mcluhan argues that we need technology to survive.

 ‘Previous technologies were partially and fragmentary, and the electric is total and inclusive. An external consensus of conscience is now as necessary as private consciousness.’ (Giddings and Lister, 2011, p. 86) Because electricity is all encompassing, and we need it as a necessity, it is almost impossible for us to escape its grasp.

McLuhan’s main argument is invalid, we do not need technology to survive, it’s a fantastic invention, and it certainly makes life easier, but people do survive without it in low economically developed countries and technology did not always exist, so if we really could not survive without it how did we come to be? Williams’ argument however is more relevant, in the fact that it enhances our society and our living becomes easier, but is not an essential need.

Bibliography

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

Mchluhan, M. Selected material from Understanding Media: The Extensions of man, in Giddings, S. and Lister, M. (eds.) (2011) The New Media and Technocultures reader, London and New York, Routledge.