In our discussion of cultural approaches to communication in class yesterday, there were two forms of media that defined societies, namely, time-biased and space-biased media theories developed by Harold A. Innis. Both of these ideas rest on the physicality of the medium itself in determining a particular society’s development and impact on the rest of the world.
Time-biased media—the heavy, immobile forms of media such as stone tablets or the pyramids in Egypt, were long-lasting, and encouraged the expansion of empires over long periods of time, according to Innis. Societies which used time-biased media tended to be more moralistic and customary, facilitating social hierarchies with their constant reminders of the status quo.
Space-biased media, in contrast, because of its lightness and portability, afforded empires the opportunity for conquest, and although these media didn’t last as long, they were rapidly expansive. Thus, Innis says, space-biased media societies tended toward militaristic and territorial.
Our reading on Innis stated that “empires are characterized by the media they use the most effectively,” with truly stable societies finding a balance in between the two. But something I found interesting, which I’m sure will be addressed in greater detail as the class goes on, is the role that geography plays in determining what media is available, and thus whether a society becomes time-biased or space-biased.
Innis’ discussion examines how media and information technologies affect political and social structures and practices. But Innis also states that “Monopolies of Knowledge” are derived from, among other things, control of raw materials for media. Rome’s conquest of Egypt, for example, gave it the greater access and control to papyrus, which could be seen as advancing its space-biased media and aiding Rome in further conquests.
In applying the time- and space-biased media theories to today, geography is still reflexively involved. Despite its flaws, the dependency theory of communication explains the world is designed in such a way to keep some countries dependent on others, namely, the “Third World” dependent on the “First World.” This is directly tied to colonialism. Imperial countries took over areas of the world because of the commodities they offered—thus, geography was the determining factor.
The space-based media of colonial powers in the 18th and 19th centuries assisted their occupation of territories around the world. But it’s interesting to note what happened at the decline of colonialism, and the decline of colonial powers. As Innis said, an empire reaches its greatest height just before it falls. And when colonial powers fell, the newly independent societies were left with a skeletal infrastructure, and skeletal media base. Thus development was slow-coming, particularly development of media. It will be even more interesting to see how time- and space-based media develop in the former colonized areas of the world, and how that affects the powers of their societies.
No comments:
Post a Comment