Trinis Take Two
Williams argues that the integration of television into contemporary society is so parallel to the evolution of the society itself that the two (television and the social evolution of society) cannot be separated. That is to say, the effects of television are so in tandem with the social evolution of contemporary society that they may be considered one in the same. Miller and Slater come to a distinctly different conclusion in identifying the evolution of the Internet in Trinidad as being particularly influenced by the unique society and culture of Trinis. This localism is highlighted in the dynamics outlined in chapter one. Miller and Slater were effectively arguing through the presentation of the dynamics, that the Internet was a medium in which the masses were reached, yet various technical differentiations and possibilities of material culture “added up to their Internet” (pg. 14).
One direct manifestation of this can be seen in the development of the Miss Universe website in 1999. As the Trinis navigated the dynamics of positioning, they were able to display their culture, professionalism, and potential for commercialism through the Miss Universe website. Miller and Slater do not outright argue that the website would have been different had it been created in a different geographical location. However, I feel they would not disagree with this statement. The Miss Universe website is an example where the infusion of Trini values and culture into the end product is clear and visible. Furthermore, the website exemplifies the Trinidadian group identity as being Wordly citizens capable of entrepreneurialism and professionalism on a global scale.
This ability to parse out the impact of the culture on the medium is in direct contrast to Williams’s argument that the two are inseparable in the case of American television. I feel that this stark difference could be traced to differences between the two technologies. When television began broadcasting, there were relatively few choices of content. It was in its essence a mass medium in that it had very little variation in message content being delivered to the masses. I will argue that the Internet’s content varies drastically (even in its earliest stages) and is less of a mass medium because of this. The Internet’s personalized structure allows for a more personalized analysis of the medium. That is to say, in having such a wide variety of content available to the mass audience, it is plausible to analyze the Internet in terms of the impact of a culture on the Internet and vice-versa. As the television environment has evolved to include hundreds of potential channels and digital recording capacity, it would be interesting to see if Williams would continue to argue that the influence of culture cannot be separated from the influence of the medium.