Question

determine if McLuhan used the critical perspective in his thinking about the medium is the message. Specifically, does McLuhan:

1. Question commonly held assumptions?
2. Expand the bounds of debate?
3. Aim for the betterment of society?

Is McLuhan using the critical perspective? If so, explain how his thinking utilizes the above characteristics. If not, explain how his approach differs from the above.

. 500 words maximum.

Answer 1

McLuhan says that the content is the message. He makes a sharp contrast between the content and character of the message. He gives emphasis on the content of the message and its social effect. The content carries the the real theme of the mesdage and there ia no role of the characters and the characters do not have any social effect.

The content of the message is the meaning of the message. It reates effect in the people. Generally it appears that the people are blind to the characters of the message as they think what is said in the message. The main issue of the message is expressed in the content not in the characters.

He makes his critical thinking clear by explaining it vividly. The contentbof the message is speech. Speech is expresssed both in verbal and written form. As the message is delivered through written form then the speech is supposed to be the content of the message. Again, writing is printed and therefore writing is the content of printing. Again writing is delivered through telegraph. So, writing is the content of the telegraph. So, it is clear that writing is the main object of a message. Character is only a technical matter. It includes language of the message. So, what language is used is not the matter of serious issue.

Then he explains the term 'medium'. To explain the term medium he gives the example of light bulb. Light bulb is used to make light the dark spot. Light bulb itself is nothing without electricity. It works only as medium. But the main function is done by the electricity. If there is no electricity, it becomes absolutely useless. Similarly, the medium of the message is nothing without content. Message can be delivered by any dependable medium. The medium bears no significance. There are numerous types of medium. So, the people are not bothered with medium. The content is the matter of interest to the people. As for example, one gets the message of death of his friend. He may get it by any medium.

McLuhan totally ignores the nature and effect of the character of the message. He also ignores the role of medium. But in some cases we fund the effect of both characters and medium. It is undoubtedly true that content is a main matter of the message. But there is also the authenticity of various medium. The effect of indirect medium is not so authentic than the authentic medium. The authenticity of the medium depends on the nature of the medium. If medium and characters are not clear and dependable then content becomes vague. The content depends on the character and medium.