fundamental change enabled by technology, Williams perceives technology as
reflecting existing social stratification, wealth, and power.
McLuhan’s technological determinism considers technological artefacts as
‘extensions of man’, where the form of technology itself has more fundamental
influence on human behaviour than the message that is related through
technology.
77 It follows from this ‘extension thesis’, as it is called by Lister
et al.,
78 that McLuhan does not make a distinction between the terms ‘media’
and ‘technology’; both are extensions of our senses, tools in our hands. In a
famous example McLuhan depicts how the simple technology of light bulb has
transformed society by creating a new environment, i.e. the use of night-time for
activities, although the bulb itself is empty of content, it is merely the medium.
Similarly, he claims that the impact of television on society does not depend on
the content of television shows, i.e. the influence is identical regardless of
whether the shows are children’s shows or illustrated violence.
79 The strong suit
of technological determinism is that it brings the disruptive element of ICTs to
the front by considering the emergence of new media as a fundamental change of
society. Shortcomings of technological determinism boil down to its lack of
sociological sensitivity. McLuhan’s position is not interested in sociological
analysis of power relations, wealth, and social norms present in technology.
Hence, Williams’s critique hits a spot as he brings attention to McLuhan’s
reductionist overtone where the complicated social history of the media is
brought down simply to their effects.
80
Contrary to McLuhan’s narrow determinist focus on technology, Williams
insists on human agency and calls attention to the social and ideological practices
that he considers relevant to the impact of new technology. Instead of fundamental change, he downplays the disruptive nature of modern technology and
sees hegemonic and existing ideologies, social classes, and social norms more
decisive for reception and use of media than any specific form of technology.
81
By asking why and how certain technology is achieved, Williams is able to
establish a more nuanced approach that is more sensitive to ideological elements
involved in the acceptance of technology. At the same time, however, technology
becomes an extension of already existing social practices and has little disruptive
value beyond this scope.
Due to its sociologically comprehensive approach, Williams’s theory has
become the mainstream of media and communication theory.
82 Still, McLuhan’s
more generalised and provocative remarks have their value as his theory accentuates the radical change brought on by new media. Later on, the multidisciplinary field of science and technology studies (STS) has adopted an understanding
of technology, which combines William’s constructivist approach with elements
of McLuhan’s theory. In this tradition, French philosopher Bruno Latour combines elements of both approaches in his actor network theory, which allows
agency to physical objects as parts of networks of humans and objects.
83 In any
case, McLuhan’s and Williams’ work on theorising media has paved the way for
later developments of media theory and still provides a point of reference for
these discussions.
84
Understanding law and technology 45
reflecting existing social stratification, wealth, and power.
McLuhan’s technological determinism considers technological artefacts as
‘extensions of man’, where the form of technology itself has more fundamental
influence on human behaviour than the message that is related through
technology.
77 It follows from this ‘extension thesis’, as it is called by Lister
et al.,
78 that McLuhan does not make a distinction between the terms ‘media’
and ‘technology’; both are extensions of our senses, tools in our hands. In a
famous example McLuhan depicts how the simple technology of light bulb has
transformed society by creating a new environment, i.e. the use of night-time for
activities, although the bulb itself is empty of content, it is merely the medium.
Similarly, he claims that the impact of television on society does not depend on
the content of television shows, i.e. the influence is identical regardless of
whether the shows are children’s shows or illustrated violence.
79 The strong suit
of technological determinism is that it brings the disruptive element of ICTs to
the front by considering the emergence of new media as a fundamental change of
society. Shortcomings of technological determinism boil down to its lack of
sociological sensitivity. McLuhan’s position is not interested in sociological
analysis of power relations, wealth, and social norms present in technology.
Hence, Williams’s critique hits a spot as he brings attention to McLuhan’s
reductionist overtone where the complicated social history of the media is
brought down simply to their effects.
80
Contrary to McLuhan’s narrow determinist focus on technology, Williams
insists on human agency and calls attention to the social and ideological practices
that he considers relevant to the impact of new technology. Instead of fundamental change, he downplays the disruptive nature of modern technology and
sees hegemonic and existing ideologies, social classes, and social norms more
decisive for reception and use of media than any specific form of technology.
81
By asking why and how certain technology is achieved, Williams is able to
establish a more nuanced approach that is more sensitive to ideological elements
involved in the acceptance of technology. At the same time, however, technology
becomes an extension of already existing social practices and has little disruptive
value beyond this scope.
Due to its sociologically comprehensive approach, Williams’s theory has
become the mainstream of media and communication theory.
82 Still, McLuhan’s
more generalised and provocative remarks have their value as his theory accentuates the radical change brought on by new media. Later on, the multidisciplinary field of science and technology studies (STS) has adopted an understanding
of technology, which combines William’s constructivist approach with elements
of McLuhan’s theory. In this tradition, French philosopher Bruno Latour combines elements of both approaches in his actor network theory, which allows
agency to physical objects as parts of networks of humans and objects.
83 In any
case, McLuhan’s and Williams’ work on theorising media has paved the way for
later developments of media theory and still provides a point of reference for
these discussions.
84
Understanding law and technology 45