Week 1. Technological Determinism, Cultural Materialism and Everything In-Between

From McLuhan's Technological determinism where technology is the driver of social change through 'Simulacra' theory of constant simulation and Raymond William's theories of selective participation in 'Cultural Materialism' it becomes apparent that no one school of thought can give a finite definition of the role or dominance of technology in social and cultural change. he Cultural Materialist camp is right in criticising McLuhan's viewpoint by emphasizing the role that social need, cultural adoption and political acceptance play in the success or failure of all technologies. An engagement with critical theory is almost mandatory in understanding the junctures between technology and these elements, which shape the implementation and future development of technologies.

One area of particular interest in the Andrew Murphie article is the theories of Andrew Feenberg, that technologies are imbued with the rules and aims constructed by the elites before their goal as a technology is decided. I certainly appreciate the level of government regulation that is involved in releasing a technology to the masses, however I do not consider this to be an absolute truth. For example many governments are struggling to adequately regulate online communications emanating from their states into the global online space. The breakdown of defined jurisdictions allows for innovative application of global communication tools, which give rise to new technologies such as the blogesphere, twitter, Youtube video uploads etc.

Leading on from this into cultural materialism, it is my argument that societies bring with them familiar communication and motor skills to any new technology. A counter-intuitive technology may not be successful to spite its apparent revolutionary merits. For example an iPhone requires the use of a pointed digit, facebook assumes prior knowledge of post-it note style announcement and the ability to construct a photo-album. Neither of these technologies, amongst many other examples relies solely on their ability to rupture society and force the changing of behaviours. What these technologies do give rise to is a reinvigoration of McLuhan's concept of  "Global Village".

Tiziana Terranova in her opening address at the Futurity Now conference refers to "fluid democracies" as a kind of participatory government where transparency becomes a key factor and I believe this resonates with what McLuhan was suggesting television had provided the masses. The relationships between people are strengthened through a shared experience. Television brought this concept so far in the mid 20th century by beaming the world into peoples lounge rooms. The internet as a two way platform now allows the right of reply in a conversation style, which again is an old technology re-purposed for a new medium.