The intriguing Associate Professor Stephen Stockwell (not pictured right) began our lecture theatre journey into the history of communication studies on a fine – and very early – Friday morning, introducing us to such innovative researchers and theorists as George Gerber and Larry Gross, Raymond Williams, Stanley Cohen, Water Benjamin, and – of particular mention – Canadian born, ‘pop philosopher’ Marshall McLuhan (pictured right).
McLuhan’s theory was based around a variety of communication media transmission types and the level of audience participation to each, as well as particular media’s influence. These text types were categorised as follows;
- McLuhan’s argument went that particular media types, such as a book or photo, require very little audience participation, or completion as the media communicated is done so in a way that requires the use of only one ‘sense’ of the audience, e.g. to see, to read. McLuhan stated that these text types were very detailed versions of communication, providing highly specified and detailed information. These media types were labelled as ‘hot’ media.
- Alternatively, many 1960’s text types required much more audience participation and contemplation. Such text types, e.g. a drawn cartoon, or a television program; provided very little specified details and required the audience to use a mix of their own senses to ‘fill in the blanks’. These media types were categorised as ‘cold’ media.
I believe that McLuhan’s theory is a major representation of the media types available as avenues for communication in the 1960’s, which, in comparison to today’s complex roadmap of communication possibilities (many of which cannot be categorised according to McLuhan’s appropriate outlines), is now quite outdated.
For example, the current heavy reliance on the computer as a communication device presents two categorisation arguments. Firstly, the ability to access the internet or encyclopedia programs, view digital photos or watch cinema features; influences us to think that the computer is a ‘hot’ media type in its ability to provide such detailed information. Alternatively, as today’s computer generation rapidly grows, the media type becomes much more participative, and provides many ‘cooler’ media options, where more blanks must be filled.
The mobile phone presents another ‘warm’ McLuhan challenge. As such a highly connective device it works further towards the ‘cooler’ global village idea and requires (more often than not) a highly participative media requirement – but is still able to rapidly communicate detailed information.
It seems fashionable almost that such media devices as those expressed above that cannot be categorised into either groupings create a greater influence on individuals, and hence spur astronomical popularity. McLuhan’s major theory was in that both ‘hot’ and ‘cold’ media types provided different influential abilities on the audience – where if the audience is tuned in more intently (i.e. less participation, as well as more detailed and well defined information) the influence would be greater. Perhaps our now more ‘room temperature / warm’ media alternatives present an argument to McLuhan’s thermostat thinking.
Zechowski, S., The Museum of Broadcast Communications, date n/a. ‘Marshall McLuhan’ {Online}. Available from:
http://www.museum.tv/archives/etv/M/htmlM/mcluhanmars/mcluhanmars.htm
(cited 16th March 2007)
Hosted by Guthro, J., CBC Archives, Radio broadcast, June 22, 1965. ‘A Pop Philosopher’ {Online}. Available from:
http://archives.cbc.ca/IDC-1-69-342-1818/life_society/mcluhan/clip4
(cited 16th March 2007)
Hirst, M. & Harrison, J., Oxford University Press, 2007, ‘Communication and New media – from broadcast to narrowcast’
No comments:
Post a Comment