Communication media, control over time or space, and substitution of human civilization
In Chapter 2, “the Bias of Communication”, the key proposition is that “the use of a medium of communication over a long period will to some extent determine the character of knowledge to be communicated and suggest that its pervasive influence will eventually create a civilization in which life and flexibility will become exceedingly difficult to maintain and that the advantages of a new medium will become such as to lead to the emergency of a new civilization” (p. 34). The key concepts include the characteristics of the communication medium at that time, control over time or over space, and substitution of human civilization.
Innis examined a series of Western civilizations, and characterized them as either emphasizing control over time or control over space. He explained the rise and fall of each of these civilizations as due to their differential emphasis over time and space. It is frequently stated that the previous civilization was replaced by the new one because the new one corrected the previous one in its failure to strengthen the control over time (or space), and the new one was replaced by the newer one because while overcorrecting the previous one, the new civilization weakened its control over space (or time). It seems the civilizations alternate between control over time and over space, trying to reach the equilibrium.
Innis believed the inherent traits of the primary communication medium in each civilization determine whether it would emphasize the control over time or space. Media heavy but durable, like clay and stone, led to emphasis on control over time, while media light but perishable, like papyrus and parchment, led to emphasis on control over space.
Innis’s propositions are original, especially by assigning communication medium such a critical role in historical development of human civilization. It is inspiring that the medium affects potentials for the content, channels and influence of communication, which affect the control and stability of a civilization. Using tangible artifacts such as stone and papyrus to explain human history may sound more convincing to many people than inferring from historical events and figures, the “facts” of which are frequently under dispute.
However, Innis’s view is a strong version of technology determinism. The available technology, the communication medium in this case, is the only determinant for the development of human civilization. No agency is counted, either in selection among alternative media or in the actual organizing and governing carried out in different civilizations. Human beings seem completely passive and controlled by the communication medium. Therefore, while offering a new and intriguing perspective, Innis missed many other factors that should be taken into consideration, and offered an oversimplified explanation.