Technological Determinism: Which came first, the chicken or the egg?
Marshall McLuhan’s technological determinism takes us down history lane. Technological determinism theorizes that society’s social structure and cultural values are shaped by its communication technology. This can be translated to meaning WHAT society cares about and HOW it expresses that concern is dependent on technology.
Let’s begin with the tribal paradigm. McLuhan categorizes this as the earliest form of human organization when communication was primarily through oral transmission. The only way information spread was either through an experience or orally told by someone else. A time when we weren’t all suffering from tech neck.
The print paradigm, 600 or so years ago, is when communication transformed to written mediums. Information could be conveyed even after the experience occurred. This paradigm was then replaced with the electronic paradigm, which we’re living in today. The major difference between the two is that in the print paradigm, communication is linear and can only be consumed one medium at a time. You’re using a single sense — your eyes. In the electronic paradigm, you can use more than one sense at a time, for example, scrolling on social media while on the phone with a friend. A paradigm where tech neck does exist. (Can you tell I suffer from tech neck? I’m working on it.)
There are clearly strong degrees to the technological determinism theory. In the electronic paradigm, McLuhan sees the media as an “extension” of the senses. This changes social structure and cultural values as society communicates in different contexts. This context could be their physical (location) or the communication medium (print, tv, etc.) For example, those from different social classes are consuming the same information but internalizing and taking action differently based on their context, this either strengthens the social structure or changes it. Another strong degree is how media reflects culture. In this case, McLuhan strongly believes that the medium of communication heavily influences the message, meaning the same message on different mediums (print v. electronic) can be interpreted differently. In the case of mass media, this impacts and potentially shapes culture, especially pop culture. How fast do we see “cancel culture” spread? Fast in print, and faster and harsher in electronic. Another strong concept within the theory is experiencing global changes in tandem with technological advances. McLuhan’s argued a “global village” could be created by electronic media as the internet allows instant, long-distance communication.
As with any theory, there are also limitations. Technology is technically never forced on society. It’s hard to argue that society is shaped by technology when society has to choose to use that technology in the first place. On a similar note, another limitation is the argument that technological determinism oversimplifies society. The theory believes society is shaped by communication mediums, rather than society coming to their own conclusions. A third limitation is the focus of power the theory gives to media. As we’ve experienced, there are several other powers that drive society sentiment, for example, politics, education, and access to media depending on financial status.
Technological determinism forms strong connections between correlating advances in society and technology, but I find it misleading in its finite cause and effect perspective. Technology is not at the center of what drives society, it’s a strong contender, but it’s not the center. Humans are too complex to be driven by a single source. I’m not sure there is a center.
