Mengxiao Zhu's Seminar Blog

Today's Question: What would Innis make of the Internet? Write a brief analytical comment about the relation of the Internet to society that you can defend as consistent with Innis's ideas in some way. For example, you might employ one of his concepts (information monopoly, time-biased, space-biased) or borrow one of his analyses from an earlier technology (cuneiform's effects on the invention of abstraction in math) and apply it to the Internet.

My Response:
When thinking of Innis and Internet together, the first question hit my mind is how Innis would label Internet. That is, is Internet time-biased or space-biased? It seems that Internet belongs to neither category, but the Internet has the advantages of both at the same time. For service providers, the operation of the Internet requires heavy media and devices, such as cables, computers, routers and etc. All of them are not very portable to provide stable services. The Internet for the users, however, is independent of specific devices. Individual users can always access the Internet no matter where they are and what receivers they are using, which could be laptops, desktops, or even PDAs and cell phones. So, the Internet is both portable and unportable. On the other hand, while the information on the Internet is constantly changing, it is usually convenient to find archived information with the help of search engines. So, it could be said that the Internet is both changing and stable. Innis may conclude that the Internet breaks the limitation of time and space and thus doesn’t fit into the “time-biased and space-biased” classification.
Actually, the Internet integrated almost all communication methods and media adopted by human beings. On the Internet, people can exchange information using oral method with the help of audio or video communication tools. Written characters and texts are also widely used on the Internet in all kinds of websites. Radio and TV services are provided online as well.
Another important characteristic of the Internet is that individuals are no longer silent information receivers. They can easily become information providers. Consequently, this new technology has the potential of breaking the information and knowledge monopoly, and can eventually change the social relations and the society structures.

Posted by mzhu4 at 06:32 PM | Permalink

Today's Question: The Bias of Communication is known as a "classic" in the study of communication technology, but it is also described as "difficult," "nonlineal," "puzzling," and "a struggle" -- probably chiefly because the book does not build to a sustained or coherent argument. Choose one of the three essays assigned for today and read them in the manner suggested by the introduction -- as an "idea file." Identify some important concept, theory, or insight in the essay you chose and describe its importance. Please describe the idea critically as appropriate -- list drawbacks as well as praise. It may be helpful to reference earlier class readings as a point of comparison to show what is different about Innis' ideas or his disciplinary approach (economic history).

My Response:
In his second essay, “The Bias of Communication” Innis stated his unique observation of communication medium. Innis suggested that to study communication medium’s “important influence on the dissemination of knowledge over space and over time” in “its cultural setting”, it is “necessary to study its characteristics”. Two characteristics of communication medium were identified, time bias and space bias. The former is heavy and durable medium, such as clay and stone. This kind of medium is not suitable for transportation but has the characteristic of time bias. In contrast, the latter is light and easily transported, such as papyrus and paper. Its characteristic makes this kind of medium transportable but not long lasting, i.e. space bias.
According to Innis, the history of human civilization is the evolution of communication medium. The progress of human society and dissemination of knowledge is closely related to the medium adopted. The communication medium can reflect the cultural characteristics of the civilization. As general trend, the communication media adopted by people are from heavy to light, and from time bias ones to space bias.
Innis pointed out that time bias medium is religionary, commercial and monopolistic. Time bias medium emphasizes the authority, hierarchy and inviolability. It is difficult to utilize time bias medium to control a very large area. Power can be only confined in a relatively small area when using clay and/or stone as the communication medium. The dissemination of knowledge through space is also difficult. On the other hand, space bias medium is political, democratic and for the masses. This kind of medium can help the emperors to expand their territory and assist dissemination of science and knowledge. As a result, people can easily access knowledge and development the ability of “thinking”. With the rise of printing medium, the monopoly of papacy and church was broken. In Innis’s eye, the human history is the history of communication medium development and competition. The secret of a long lasting authority is balancing of time bias and space bias medium.
Unlike other readings from this course, Innis's essay is looking at "macro-history". Instead of focusing on any specific communication medium, Innis studied and generalized the trend of medium evolution and its impact on human society development. This method is very interesting and unique. But, Innis’s opinion is obviously technology determinism, which is criticized explicitly or implicitly in our previous readings. Communication medium is considered to be almost the only driven power of human society development. Human and/or society passively accept any available communication medium and can only follow the trend of technology development. Innis also seems to be very pessimistic about the medium evolving processes. In Innis’s description, existing authority usually neglects or even confines the power of advanced medium and thus turned out to be replaced by others. The continuity of knowledge and eternity are thus hurt in this process.

Posted by mzhu4 at 08:56 PM | Permalink

Today's Question: For this answer, try to highlight a conclusion that Miller & Slater make that differs from what we know about an older technology. That is, Miller & Slater cover themes that are very familiar from our earlier readings -- such as businesspeople and consumers trying to come to terms with a new communication technology -- but they occasionally come to strikingly different conclusions. Consider Chapter 6, "Doing Business Online," which chronicles several instances where Trinis try to employ new communication technologies (Web site design businesses, textiles catalogs, Miss Universe, etc.). Compare one of these instances and any conclusions that Miller & Slater draw from this material (e.g., about decommodification, virtual vs. real, the dynamics from ch. 1) to an analogous instance with an older technology covered by another author in this course (Douglas, Marvin, Fischer, Williams). How do you explain this difference in conclusions? e.g., Is the difference the result of technology (the Internet?), the method, the theoretical approach, assumptions, Trini culture, etc.?

I would like to choose to comment on the conclusion about virtual vs. real on the online business in Trinidad. From the descriptions in the book, we found that the applications of “ecommerce” and advertising on Internet was not well supported by the advertising agencies and not understood by the business holders. The value of Internet was very “dubious” and the web designers in Trinidad encountered the paradoxical situation. It seems that in the development of Internet in Trinidad the virtual support or tools were not well combined and utilized in reality. It was a different case for the development of telephone for example. In Fischer’s book, we read that with the development of telephone technology, the business people were willing to pay to include telephone into their daily business. People seemed to have no trouble to combine the virtual world created by using telephone with reality. But for Internet, its value was either neglected or exaggerated. For me, there are three reasons for the differences. Firstly, different technologies were considered. Internet is a more complex technology with the combination of many different media and channels, which can not be easily manipulated and utilized very quickly. Secondly, if we look back now, we will say that the analysis and description in the book was based on early history of Internet. It may be very different now. The Fischer book, again as an example, was written after the technology became mature. It is possible that when writing about a technology with longer history some details and early frustrations would be omitted. Thirdly, the description in the Miller & Slater book is only about Trinidad. So, the conclusions may not be generalized to the development of the technology Internet to some other areas.

Posted by mzhu4 at 07:30 PM | Permalink