6/18/2023 0 Comments Neil postmanWould there be jobs for us would-be journalists once the dust settled could we still write valuable stories between the clickbait? In 2015, we didn’t think much about the consequences of pivoting to very-online discourse. The students in my class were busy asking the practical questions. Only if technologies are neutral - but they’re not.Īccording to Postman, “This is why Thamus is concerned not with what people will write he is concerned that people will write.” That must mean that what you read is more important than what you’re reading on, right? legacy) affect the message? Some of us may not have liked it, but there was evidence that people do read long-form journalism on their mobile devices. I can even recall bad arguments about it from my graduate courses, where students and the professor sparred over the costs and benefits of “digital journalism.” Did the medium (online v. The principle Postman highlights here is one that’s still regularly debated. There’s good reason to fear, though: no technology is impartial. We need both eyes open, but things are weighted so heavily in favour of the technophiles that any dissent sounds like fear. Instead, if the tech-lash of the last few years is any clue, what’s required is a willingness to doubt the technophiles. But we don’t need more technophobes to reject new developments outright. Today, as in the late 1990s, the technophiles speak the loudest, but dissenting voices are making themselves heard. One-eyed prophets are the Technophiles and the Technophobes, neither of whom see clearly. “Every technology is both a burden and a blessing,” therefore, whatever our tendency - to praise or to curse - we should avoid becoming “one-eyed prophets.” It is an error to see only the deficiencies caused by technological change, just as it is an error to only see the benefits. Postman reminds readers that society has benefitted quite obviously and considerably from writing. Speaking of the invention of writing, Thamus believes “writing will be a burden on society and nothing but a burden." The story is illustrative on several points, and Postman expands many of them, but the first lesson comes via an error of the wise king. He recounts “The Judgement of Thamus,” as told by Plato, where the great king judges the inventions of Theuth, the god of invention. What follows are the main observations and arguments in Postman’s case for thoughtful engagement with technology. The cultural transformation caused by new technologies happens quickly, but it doesn’t have to happen thoughtlessly. We must think critically about new technologies because someone is always already thinking about how to use them practically. In the opening chapter of Technopoly, Postman makes a case for taking technological change seriously. Previously in the series: Introducing Technopoly
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |