Page 135 - Communication Theory Media, Technology and Society
P. 135

Holmes-04.qxd  2/15/2005  1:00 PM  Page 118





                    118  COMMUNICA TION THEORY
                    Recasting broadcast in terms of medium theory


                    By far the strongest case for medium theory is the way in which we can
                    reappraise broadcast media in a consolidated fashion. Just as, McLuhan
                    argues, old media become the content of a new medium, so too the medi-
                    ums that are made possible by old media can be viewed in a new way.
                    Human-made environments remain unperceived by individuals ‘during
                    the period of their innovation. When they have been superseded by other
                    environments, they tend to become visible’ (McLuhan and Fiore, 2001: 17).
                        From the vantage point of second-generation medium theory, we can
                    also look at some of the older media theorists and recast their work as
                    ‘medium theories’ of broadcast media. This is what I attempted in
                    Chapter 3 in explaining Althusser’s theory of ideology, Debord’s account
                    of the media spectacle, Baudrillard’s account of the simulacrum and the
                    later accounts of audience studies each as versions of medium theory.
                        However, as we shall see in the next chapter, second-generation
                    media theory needs to be distinguished from the fact that ‘transmission’
                    and content views of New Media have also been renewed in contempo-
                    rary analysis. The study of language on the Internet, of cues-filtered-out
                    approaches and of interaction views of CMC are each examples of such
                    perspectives (see Table 4.2). Similarly, audience studies continues to grow
                    as a field of media studies, but now with a renewed emphasis on the frag-
                    mented audience as well as the populist but flawed notion that the
                    Internet commands an ‘audience’.
                        Both broadcast and network forms of communicative action can be
                    studied from the point of view of their content or their medium quality. In
                    the next chapter we will see how what is common to all content (trans-
                    mission) views is that they take as their building block face-to-face interac-
                    tion and assess all communication, no matter how abstract, according to
                    how successfully it reproduces the features of such interaction. 27
                        Transmission theories are, as suggested in the earlier discussion of
                    extension, only interested in how a medium may enable the continuation
                    of face-to-face kinds of cognitive communication across time and space.
                    They are not interested in how such extension introduces entirely new quali-
                    ties which are not possible within face-to-face communication, a property
                    that is common to both broadcast and interactive technology. The latter is
                    the specialization of medium theory.
                        This basic distinction between the two methodologies is also related to
                    divergent perceptions of the function of communication in social life. For the
                    content theorists, it is cognitive interaction, but for the medium theorists,
                    it is increasingly a matter of social integration by way of media rituals. The
                    turn to ritual communication is central to second-generation medium
                    theory. As we shall see, in media societies, attachment to mediums can be
                    much more powerful that attachment to other people. Indeed, as a basis for
                    community, these mediums will always be there, from cradle to grave,
                    whilst other relationships may appear and disappear many times over.
   130   131   132   133   134   135   136   137   138   139   140