Page 172 - Communication Theory Media, Technology and Society
P. 172

Holmes-05.qxd  2/15/2005  1:00 PM  Page 155





                                                          Interaction versus Integration  155
                  better visibility. ‘Media, like walls and windows, can hide and they can
                  reveal. Media can create a sense of sharing and belonging or a feeling of
                  exclusion and isolation. Media can reinforce a “them versus us” feeling or
                  they can undermine it’ (7).
                      Importantly, however, Meyrowitz resists the temptation, common-
                  place in much Internet literature, to see New Media as having abolished
                  face-to-face interaction. Rather, for him, New Media expand the range of
                  possibilities of how individuals might interact, which can sometimes
                  present conflicting senses of the normative context in which actors are able
                  to take on roles. This may include confusion about which medium to under-
                  take interaction in, and the nature of expectations individuals feel about
                  having to speak, to reply or to listen. Thus the title of Meyrowitz’s book
                  No Sense of Place alludes not to the disappearance of a sense of place, but
                  to the saturation of the self by a clash of ontological ‘levels’ of association.
                      In a communicative culture dominated by television, individuals are
                  typically able to hide behind the medium of broadcast when they are
                  actually interacting with a television itself. Without the comfort of the
                  television on, even in the background, a kind of role-vacuum is created, in
                  which responsibility shifts to the individual to be self-active.
                      Meyrowitz’s analysis is well complemented in Thompson, but with
                  many of the conceptual shortcomings we identified above. Nevertheless,
                  Thompson also makes a thoroughgoing case for a ‘levels’ argument, even
                  though it does not carry a sense of integration. He claims that entire sys-
                  tems of social organization are based on these levels, but it is as though
                  such organization is functional to dynamics of techno-social systems rather
                  than fulfilling different kinds of needs that emerge out of changes in the
                  infrastructures of communication.



                  Calhoun’s phenomenological levels of socialization

                  Working from what can broadly be described as a phenomenological
                  approach, the American public sphere theorist Craig Calhoun has made
                  some progress with developing a levels approach which is an advance on
                  those of Meyrowitz and Thompson. In three important articles on computer-
                  mediated social relations, Calhoun (1986, 1992, 1998) innovatively devel-
                  ops the idea of indirect social relationships. Following C.H. Cooley’s
                  work in Social Organization (1909), Calhoun works up a typology-driven
                  model of communicative levels of social integration. Where Calhoun differs
                  from Thompson and Meyrowitz is in placing social  integration rather
                  than interaction as the traversing agency across these levels. To explain
                  this we need to revisit Cooley for a moment. In  Social Organization,
                  Cooley proposes the need to distinguish between primary and secondary
                  social relationships. ‘A primary relationship must be both directly inter-
                  personal and involve the whole person.’ A secondary relationship, by
                  contrast, ‘need meet only the criteria of directness’, but not in a way
   167   168   169   170   171   172   173   174   175   176   177