Theme 4: MacLuhan and changing thought processes

Marshall MacLuhan had many theories – some that seemed more plausible than others – and one in particular spoke about how media can take on the qualities of “intellectual technologies,” and that these media shape our thought processes. It appears that, for the most part, the mediums of information that we use do the bulk of thinking for us. The message that the medium might appear to give off isn’t what is truly the message. The medium itself is the message, and what this means is that social networks such a Twitter and Facebook can give you information about people without you even looking for it. You don’t have to do the work of getting to know a person by actually speaking to them and hoping for good, productive conversations. Instead, Facebook will do the work for you by combining status updates that might be mundane and repetitive on their own, but together can provide more insight into a person. These technologies are socializing for you.

This is also the case when it comes to search engines and smart phones that house search engine apps. Personally, I know that I don’t make the effort of trying to remember my own mother’s cell phone number by heart because I know it’s saved in my cell phone. My iPhone is becoming more than just an extension of my memory – it is my memory. Smart phones know all of your contacts’ information and usually have GPS systems already built-in so getting lost and having to find your way back using brain power is no longer an issue.

Google further perpetuates this change in thought processes. In Is Google Making Us Stupid the author speaks more about how people are being “dumbed down” because they have so much assistance from new technologies. The Internet does not only supply us with information, but it also shapes our thoughts. Whatever was planted to come up first in a search engine is what we feed off of and take in as legit information. Research that would have equated to hours in some library can now be done in a matter of minutes. Our minds are use to what is convenient, rather than what is substantial. Because of this, we are “loosing our capacity to concentrate,” and essentially loosing that which would make some of us intellectually elevated.

The new generation of tech-savvy people growing up now heavily rely on what technology provides. Children ages 10 and younger are taught that swiping their finger across a screen can get them an answer, and that typing in a key word will reveal the truth about something. What they are actually getting is a condensed opinion that they will unfortunately adopt as their own because their minds have not been trained to question ideas. They are taking on an old person’s way of thinking at an early age because of their limited exposure. This will also make them (and others living in this digital age) less inclined to read books. This fast-paced generation of people want instantaneous results to cater to their diminishing patience. This is a generation of multi-taskers, and so, spending time reading a book is less likely to happen now. What most people will do is skim over something and look for the highlights instead of fully absorbing something new. Why do the work when a podcast summary can do it for you?

Text without Context Response

1. This society has become accustomed to instantaneous answers which is shown with the growing popularity of Twitter and YouTube. These fairly new media bring in audiences because they are more willing to cut to the chase with their content. People now prefer to tune into information that is immediately available, rather than something that is analyzed, and carefully thought out. For example, instead of reading an entire news story a person is now more likely to look for a sound clip, sound bite, or short blurb. This makes it harder for individuals to develop an opinion on their own. When watching a play or movie, people will text or tweet, and they won’t give the show a chance to win them over. This pre-judging then enters the cyber world for others to adopt as their own opinions. Even scholars are guilty of falling prey to this simplified way of researching. Instead of sifting through stacks of literature, they might only search online.

2. The term “cyberkalnization” refers to the division in the World Wide Web into subgroups. People now can subscribe to only receive the specialized news that they like to hear about, and exclude everything else from getting to them. With automatically updated feeds, people are avoiding having any serendipitous encounters that might infiltrate their thoughts on what they are already use to. I am also somewhat guilty of this myself. I follow only those with opinions that I already have myself on Twitter. I know personally of people who receive Yahoo news feeds that focus only on entertainment news or sports news because they aren’t concerned with any other news. In a way, this specifically engineered filtering is beneficial for you if you only want what you’re use to. It bypasses all the extra news so that you don’t have to sift through it yourself.


3. These trends might take away from the audience that usually tuned into authors, composers, and filmmakers because if people can get a concise yet entertaining piece of their work, they won’t be inclined to look for more. The re-produced work, to them, is just as good as the original work and possibly better because you can get it in smaller portions and have it include the parts you like. These creators of original works will have their thoughts recycled, and even though it’ll be works without context, the truth is that people aren’t craving context anymore.


4. Appropriation art means giving credit to any part of a piece that was inspired by something else. This is a way to copyright, in some ways, an artist’s idea and to make sure that credit is given to a creator. The author argues that everything, especially words are owned by “owned by our entire culture,” and with a little revision and slight credit, it is okay to duplicate this. As Journalism major, I partially agree with this because I know I would not want my ideas to be copied in any way, unless full credit was being given to me. However, I think that when it comes to other forms of art, outside of written works, it gets more difficult to give credit.


5. The idea of an audience is described as archaic because we live in a time when the audience’s opinion doesn’t seem to matter. In a 2005 issue of Wired magazine the information we are given is described as “an endless, recombinant, and fundamentally social process generated by countless hours of creative product.” What the audience is receiving is a “mash up” of the same ideas from years worth of fandom that are just repackaged. Our online media is a culture of reaction from other thoughts without any new actions of our own. Most online responses are driven by the sphere of old media.

The Simpsons Response

The Simpson is an interesting cartoon to evaluate because in many ways it’s a combination of a domestic situation comedy (sitcom) and a regular animated cartoon. The characters have distinct personalities as cartoons, and each one plays a different consistent role throughout each episode. Beginning with Homer Simpson, we see the atypical dysfunctional father. Homer is not like the father on Father Knows Best, who is authoritative and concerned with slight hints of wit in his conversations. He’s actually more like Al Bundy from Married With Children and the father from Roseanne, who has more of a conflicting relationship with this wife and children. He does not live his life wearing a suit even when in the house, but instead is the average blue-collared worker dealing with criticism from his wife, children, and society. He faces outlandish dilemmas in each episode and has to work with his wife, Marge (who does assume the motherly housewife role well) to do what’s best for his family – but mostly, for himself. He is not wise beyond belief, offering great advice to his kids. Homer is just the representation of an average father who is not planning on winning Father of the Year.

The Simpson family lives in the confines of the suburbs in Springfield, and have all the elements for the basic sitcom family formula. While there are certain instances in the show that seem unrealistic, overall the Simpson family is relatable because they are not like the endlessly responsible families in traditional sitcoms such as the Huxtables (The Cosby Show) or the Keatons. The things the Simpsons deal with are family issues with a twist. The kids are good at the end of the day, but Bart Simpson is always the problem child. In a way, the antics of Homer and Bart are what carry the show’s plot. Things like alien invasions or nuclear power plant explosions might come up in an episode of the Simpsons, but it would still be presented in a believable way. If someone has an anvil dropped on them, for example, the audience would be shown the pain in some way and the character will not get up and walk around like nothing ever happened.

One way The Simpsons uses traditional genres from sitcoms and cartoons to successfully bring everything together can be traced back to Warner Brothers cartoons of the 40’s and 50’s. These cartoon characters were made for the general audience and even those sophisticated members of society thought they were appealing. As decades went on, cartoons were stereotyped as being for children and finally once cartoons like the Simpsons came along, adults were returning as an audience. The animation appealed to the younger set but the dirty jokes and adult themes brought in the older set. There were cartoon predecessors like The Flintstones and The Jetsons that started this, but The Simpsons was more of a modern-day cartoon with real-life crisis. Other things within The Simpsons that drew in that postmodern audience is the cartoon they watch called Itchy and Scratchy, which is a sadistic satire of Tom and Jerry. The Simpsons does not succumb to traditional sitcom rules, and that is what makes it so appealing.

There are now more shows like that such as Family Guy, a personal favorite of mine. Then there’s Daria – a show I use to watch when new episodes were being made regularly. With Family Guy, I realized that there were certain similarities between the loaf-ish father in that cartoon and Homer in The Simpsons. The kids were more as back up characters, but the parents were very similar to the yellow-skinned inhabitants of that pink house in Springfield. Daria is an example of a cartoon show where the main character has a typical family, but basically has the focus on her and her sarcastic life comments. It’s like the reversal of what The Simpson’s does – instead of being about one dysfunctional family, it’s about one dysfunctional girl.

Thoughts on Twitter

Twitter Response Questions

Twitter is enduring because of its accessibility (it’s mobile, and right there at your fingertips) and because it allows you to know miniscule things about your friends that you never thought you’d care about. More importantly, if you’re following someone who actually has vital information, their tweets can be accompanied by useful links. Twitter is what you make of it – if you choose to follow someone whose tweets won’t contribute anything to your life, then you won’t see the good in Twitter. The act of “tweeting” something is easy, and you may begin to forget how quickly your thoughts are being broadcasted. What you will be comfortable in knowing is that whatever information you might be putting out – useless or otherwise – there is someone reading it.

This particular form of online social networking connects you to information that you might not have ever had access to. For example, if you’re following one of your favorite entertainers and they happen to be in the area you live in, they may tweet about a free concert that only their followers would be aware of. This is just one of the advantages to opening up and allowing yourself to be immersed in the world of Twitter.

Cellphone, Texts, and Lovers - Oh my!

I could really relate to what this author was talking about, especially when they wrote “re-package their physical and emotional needs.” They were describing avid texters, and how they start to form relationships through texts. I found it funny how the author knew that cellphone-text-lovers identify their potentials by nicknames so that they can stay detached and it makes me think that they might fit into this category themselves. I see the people described in this article on a daily basis – the ones who have numerous texting partners who they send the same one-liners too. They are all kept in rotation, just in case something falls through with some other ones. Since this is something affecting the younger generation the most (my generation), I think that it has a lot to do with the technology we were brought up with. We are so use to having that consistency, having those options, having that convenience and sense of entitlement. In the long run, these text relationships can only go on for so long.

The joys of distraction

The biggest issue of concern in this article is how people are beginning to lose their ability to focus. The author advises us, as the reader, to close all Internet tabs, and put away all existing electronics to prove a point – and of course, this is hard to do. Between Blackberrys, iPhones, laptops, TV’s, and Ipods, there’s something everywhere you turn that’s fighting for your attention. The more I think about it, the more I realize it’s true. Right now I’m typing up this response as I watch iCarly and go back and forth between checking my text messages and e-mail. It’s sad, but I am not the only one who thinks technology is a vital part of their life. This is what I grew up around and what I’m use to.

Facebook Love?

This article started off one way and ended another – I did not think the author was going to find love over the Internet. He wasn’t looking for it and only wanted to occupy his time by using Facebook as a distraction. Most of the people in his social network (according to Facebook) could not translate into a network of his in real life. He describes them as “hi-tech ghosts”, and while he knew a lot of about their interests based on what was displayed in their profile, he did not know them. Nevertheless, this was around the holidays and any company was good. To his surprise, he started to talk to a woman who was sharing his loneliness and things blossomed from there. This is a rare instance when social networking has created strong relationships. They are usually the spark for things, but strong relationships come through time and actual interaction.

Blogging is my anti-drug

It's really becoming my anti drug. And this is actually a good thing : ) I needed something to force me to blog.

So we're at Day 3, or the hump day, and I must say - things are getting a little easier. Last night I went out with a few friends and really wanted to tweet about some of the nonsense I was witnessing in the club, but I actually decided to make conversation with people. (That was a good and bad idea, btw)

A lot of other media deprived blogs are mentioning how much free time they have since they're not surfing the net or watching tv, but cutting Twitter out of my life hasn't exactly freed up a lot of time. I still have plenty of other apps on my phone and games I could play. I think that to really get the full effect of the assignment, I should have *gulp* cut out all things relating to my iLifeline (iPhone), because I really depend on that too much. OH well - that wasn't the assignment : )

Today I'm heading into the city (so excited! I'm such a Long Islander) and I KNOW I am going to want to Tweet about how much Valentine's Day is on steroids. I'm going to want to twitpic, but I'll relax. The city trip will be with someone who equally refuses to recognize this bogus holiday (disclaimer: while we happen to be heading out on Valentine's day, just know that this is to take advantage of the deals. . .And laugh at people like you who will be publicly swapping spit today *cringe*)

Anyway, that's all for now. Enjoy your V-day, lovers.

No one ever said it was easy. . .

. . .But no one ever said it would be so hard -_-

Day One of socializing as a real person has been interesting. Technically, this is day 2 - but this is the first day I've actually started to feel some withdrawal symptoms. Ironically, not being able to tweet (or check on the tweets of others. . .I've decided I won't cheat in that way) has actually made me more anti-social. Crazy, huh? When I don't know what everyone's doing because I'm avoiding their timeline, I don't know what's "good for the night."

I'm a techy kind of girl - I like not having to knock on doors or serendipitously run into people to make social plans. Luckily, I can still text. The downside to that is that I never mentioned before that I shy away from texting people. I think it's kind of invasive. . .(Yes, this coming from a girl who follows her friends. But hey, they don't know how much I watch them). Besides, I'd much rather be pursued. Blame it on the Leo in me.

And since texting is pretty much out, it doesn't help that I'm becoming allergic to all Facebook's foolery. Don't get me wrong - I'm not planning on deleting it. I just haven't had any reason to go on it recently. Why? Because I have no new pictures. Why? Because I don't know what everyone's doing with their lives "/

My biggest issue with Twitter is this:

That little icon on the main screen of my phone. I'm considering deleting it, only because I'm tired of looking at it and having it be the only thing I can't touch.

The truly sad part about this is that I feel like everything tweet-worthy happens when you're trying to refrain from tweeting. Or maybe that's the Twitter addict in me talking. . .all I really did today was go to Ikea (an AMAZING store, btw. Same category as Michaels), get my hair done, and watch a movie. Someone please explain to me why I felt the need to fake tweet these things on the memo pad on my phone. . .

"Spending some QT with my baby sister."

"The movie Valentine's Day has got to be the cutest, horribly-acted tear-jerker I've seen in a while. It did it's job, guys. Shoutout to Ashton Kutcher for being the lovable guy next door. Again."

"Keep your friends close. . ."

Did any of those things have some amazing and enlightening content in them? Of course not. I just felt like people would like to know and for whatever reason, I think I might actually tweet them at a later date. Just so people have an idea of what I did.

*sigh* pray for me.

Welcome to the Real World

From now (Friday, February 12th) until Sunday, the 14th I'll be going on a Twitter Detox. Trust me, it's not of my own influencing but perhaps it'll be for the best? Last night (my last official night of tweeting) I decided to talk about any and everything happening to my friends. I didn't inform my followers that I'd be gone for a few days, but despite my obvious reliance on the social networking tool, I didn't think it was all that necessary. Or maybe I'm still in denial?

Either way, wish me luck as I endure through what I'm hoping is a painless detoxification. I'll have to resort to texting people once again and sadly, when I'm wondering what everyone else is doing I'll just have to use my imagination. No retweeting clever comments, no immediate feedback or advice on an awkward situation. Nada.

I know it's only a few days but that doesn't make the process any easier *pouts* Wish me luck.