"The medium is the message" in terms of technology is that a totally new environment has been created. The "message" of technology is the change that it introduces."
[Marshall McLuhan]
Man is not static and unchanging, he is kept in constant movement, and is what his history makes him. Philosophy has over time attempted to make man conscious of this movement. The manner in which this takes place profoundly determines man's awareness of his existence. We feel secure in the source from which we grow, substance in which we live, ground on which we stand, time in which we find ourselves, and the task which confronts our age, when the movement is accomplished within the framework of a philosophy of history.1
If communication is too slow, man will search for something which is faster. The look of the medium of the media is much faster. Everything must occur instantaneously. We have become completely absorbed by simulation. As Roger Caillor states, our culture is in the process of shifting from games of competition and expression to games of risk and vertigo.2 Today, with electronic media, information is circulating at the speed of light. Every event is open to all possible interpretations, none of which can fix meaning. The wavelengths of meaning, historical memory and time around the event are shrinking. For Baudrillard, the event has become a wave, a wave which is unintelligible in terms of language or meaning. It is intelligible instantaneously in terms of color, ambience and sensory effects. Events, meaning beyond the event, politics and history will be weakly perceived, received as faint simulacra.3
With an aim toward overcoming the feeling of emptiness brought about by boredom, man searches for that which Nietzsche calls "intoxication." Intoxication may be found in the form of music, in blind worship of individuals and events, and in the tragic and senseless.4 The world, deprived of its substance, seeks fulfillment in empty dramatics. The theatrical is perceived as though it were genuine, and everyone tends to play a role instead of living. Unbelief has become the reality. Nietzsche would say that the stabilizing force that kept life going is lost and, for a while, man is completely at a loss. Now everything is false and man is advancing toward a universal state of nothingness.
The datasphere or "mediaspace," has become the new arena for human interaction, economic expansion and social and political maneuvering, a breeding ground for new ideas in culture. Power is determined by how much prime-time television or news media one can access. The mediaspace has evolved into a type of electronic social hall, an electronic town meeting. From traditional political debates to nationwide coverage of a variety of scandals, these media constructs are fostered by those who would market products and promote a consumer mindset to society. Within every media sensation are ideas, issues and agendas, often purposefully placed, that influence us less directly. To appreciate the media as a facilitator, the television viewer must learn to decode the information coming from mainstream, commercial channels, and gain command over the language being used to influence.5
Media events which bring about real social change are in Douglas Rushkoff's terms "media viruses" which spread rapidly and, if successful, permanently alter the viewer's thinking. A media virus might be an event, intention, technology, system of thought or visual image which projects its "hidden agendas" in the form of ideological codes, impacting business, education, social interaction and perception of reality. The more provocative an image, the further and faster it will travel through the datasphere. Media viruses, which may be designed to fight a political party, religion, institution, economy, business or system of thought, have taken control of culture and inhibited the natural, chaotic flow of energy and information.6
The proliferation in media technology which accelerated rapidly through the nineteenth century resulted in widespread changes in the common view of communications. Fred Inglis takes the position that television as a commercial entity must be viewed from several perspectives: as a profit-making entity in a known market; as a channel for advertising; and as a cultural and political form directly shaped by and dependent on the norms of a capitalist society. The promotion of consumer goods along with a concomitant lifestyle is generated
The political economy of mass communications has been undergoing what Inglis refers to as "convulsions." He envisions that these convulsions will render mass communication and powers of prediction beyond recognition, leading to an acute hysteria or "delirious over-optimism." Speaking of the "knowledge explosion" and "information society," the creators of relevant technology stimulate the envisioning of an endless consumer choice: a blend of cable television, direct broadcasting by satellite, public and commercial services, all coexisting for the benefit of society.7
On technology, Nietzsche speaks of the machine as representing a destiny: changing the world in which we live, causing man to become indifferent to the objects with which he deals. The machine is impersonal, removing "its small portion of humanity," effecting a change in man through the techniques that it requires. It "does not provide an impulse for rising higher...it causes busyness and monotony," while taking hold of society. Nietzsche sees everything as being determined by the masses; with the rapid, multi-sidedness of modern life smothering man. As Nietzsche says, everybody talks but nobody listens, everything is talked to death, everything is betrayed. "Everything falls into the water, but nothing falls into deep wells anymore."8
Karl Jaspers says that Nietzsche was terrified by the image of his age, discovering evidence of the destruction of culture, as waters receded into swamps and ponds; as nations hostilely drew apart and as sciences dissipated. Nietzsche viewed this as a foreshadowing of the coming barbarism with wild, primitive, merciless and immense forces. "Now everything on earth is determined only by the coarsest and most evil forces, by the egoism of those engaged in acquisitive pursuits...."9 Similar to the principle of evil, the universe is moving toward extremes, toward radical discord. When irrational justification of meaning overpowers the rational, we have the principle of evil. This conquest of evil thrives through subtle, radicalizing hidden qualities. In its move toward extremes, evil will not distinguish the true from false, but rather seek illusion and appearance, which is more false than false. Today, in order to survive, illusion no longer works; one must draw nearer to the reality of the real. Baudrillard's position is that we cannot escape the principle of evil, and that "the immoral principle of the spectacle, the ironic principle of Evil" will save us.10
According to Baudrillard, spectacle is transfigured by illusion, by a staging, which is only meaningful in its exceptional form. This will toward spectacle and illusion plagues the processes of events. In the basic event, in objective information and in the most secret thoughts and acts, there is an urge to revert to the spectacle. Things do not occur under the constraint of representation, but under extreme circumstances through the magic of their effect through which they exist.11 The story of the making of our illusions "the news behind the news" has become the most appealing news of the world. We have become so accustomed to our illusions that they are mistaken for reality. We have become consumed not by reality but by the images that have replaced reality. This is the world of our creation, the world of the image.
The current assortment of tabloid television and made-for-television movies demonstrates the fine line between reality and fiction in today's media. By inserting real news footage into fact-based, fictionalized movies, the television industry has brought information from the world of fact into the world of fiction. The distancing effects of the media and fictionalized treatment of world events as satirized conflicts, whether intentional or not, has instilled the viewing public with aesthetic and emotional safety.12
Entertainment as utilized by Hollywood and television has always been assumed to be free of "messages." Because it is received as "entertainment," popular fiction is a potent and propagandistic medium. From early consciousness, television begins to formulate patterns in the viewer's mind about the world, patterns that determine what ideas and information will be retained and what will not.13 As Hall has demonstrated, the manner in which a message is encoded into television discourse has a major impact on the way it is decoded. The acknowledgment that television production techniques have meaning, raises the argument for exploring the production process as an important link in human communication.14
Gitlin points out that television symbolizes reality in a unique way because its images, while extraordinary, appear in ordinary settings. Because the viewer's guard is down while watching television, images are screened differently according to individual world views, registering as symbols of diversion and ideology at the same time. The presence of the medium is such that the viewer doesn't reflect on or study the meanings. Television inscribes images of the acceptable and "has become the collective secondhand dream of American society."15 Ideology, or a set of assumptions that becomes second nature, is ingrained in television and the viewer is captivated by it. As Jerry Mander states, many technologies determine their own use, effects and those who control them and as such, technology should be thought of as having ideology built into its form.16
By removing images from immediate experience and passing them through a machine, television leads to humans losing one of the attributes that differentiate them from objects. Mander argues that television is a form of sense deprivation which causes disorientation to a sense of time and place, leaving the viewer less able to distinguish real from false and internal from external.17 He contends that humans once outside the cloud of television images, would be living in a reality which is less artificial. Mander along with Jacques Ellul argue against technology, asserting that once rid of television our information field would instantly expand to include aspects of life which have been forgotten.18 Boorstin predicts that we have become so accustomed to testing reality by the image that it will be difficult to retrain ourselves to test the image by reality. He contends that it becomes more difficult to moderate our expectations and to shape expectations after experience. We have had the power to shape "reality" for so long, that it will be difficult to rediscover the natural world.19
The media operate in an increasingly hostile public environment; are under public pressure to be more than profit-making concerns and cannot ignore serious ethical issues on the public agenda. There is much criticism of media assigned to further the agenda of special interest groups. Criticism is not designed to engender ethical, fair and balanced thinking. If the media disregard ethical issues on the public agenda, government and other power institutions will further intrude into the news process, which could jeopardize the First Amendment and the concept of free media.
New technology makes information used in decision-making more mobile. Who will have access to the data that technology must store to ensure that correct decisions are made? Along with the increased attitude of social responsibility comes a greater awareness of ethical codes and emphasis on the use of media power. The editor, program head and broadcaster for a television channel perform the most important creative function of cultural industries, shaping the temper of the times.20 The class of decision makers comprised of corporate leaders, heads of professional, labor, political and religious organizations all have access to data. These decision makers allocate our lives for the growth of power, the legitimation of which in matters of social justice, is based on optimizing the efficiency of the system.21
Journalists express and often subscribe to the dominant economic, political and social ideas and values, while laboring over self-imposed rules for covering news. Those who engage in story-form news are often unaware of how pervasively certain aesthetic values rather than news values shape their work. Individual components of the media system operate under their own professional rules. There is a strong need for autonomy and resistance to pressure, especially in sectors governed by the tradition of journalism. As networks attempt to keep costs down, we will probably see more resource sharing and mergers of news divisions. How this will effect the issue of maintaining the integrity of the journalistic process will be a major concern.
How much of television news is "show" in which entertainment values predominate and how much is "substance?" Assuming that all news presentations contain a degree of substance, one can question whether journalists are basically objective or consciously argumentative in their journalistic practice. One can also question whether "objectivity" is possible given the ideological framework within which journalists operate. There have been ongoing debates concerning the ethical position of the television journalist's involvement in a story and the natural inclination to take an ideological stand by virtue of that involvement. In television journalism, more so than in print journalism, the symbol of truth becomes the image of the journalist.
One should not view television news coverage as a separate and distinct process from the events being reported nor as a neutral conveyor of these events. Television news always involves a process of selection as to which events to report and which to omit, which aspects to emphasize and which to downplay. While television's coverage may be perceived as the natural outcome of democratic government, it may also be seen as a subversion of the democratic process. This is a result of television's powers of sensual saturation which incite the tensions between reason and emotion, judgment and prejudice, reflection and impulse. On television, image becomes reality, symbol becomes substance, sound becomes sense and shock becomes cognition.22
Television is in a sense an actor on the political stage. Mander argues that television itself predetermines who shall use it, how it shall be used, what effects it will have on individuals and what political forms will emerge. Assuming that television is simply a window through which any perception, argument or reality may pass, it has the capability to inform and is potentially useful to democratic processes.23 A distinctive feature of television news is the extent to which it is an ideological medium, providing not just information or entertainment, but "packages for consciousness," frameworks for interpreting and suggestions for reacting to social and political reality.24 Television news is widely believed to be the most powerful force in journalism, and is often condemned for its political influence.
Studies indicate that the public believes the most important issues are those which receive the most television coverage. Events become transformed into news only if they meet specific demands and practices of the newsmaking process.25 Even if one accepts the premise that news is whatever the media say it is, the grounds on which the media decide which events to report and which to ignore must be challenged. Consider the notion of "importance." Should one think of importance in terms of the consequences and disregard public interest in those consequences? Should not the ramifications and moral implications of one's decision be considered?
As Schopenhauer has stated, "the whole structure of our world of thought rests on the world of perceptions" which provide the actual concept of thinking. Understanding of things and their relations consists insofar as one can represent them in distinct perceptions without the use of words.26 The true view of life, correct insight and clear judgment emanate from the degree of sharpness in thought and manner in which one understands the world of perception.27
Schopenhauer strongly believed that every grain of knowledge is a perception; and every new truth the result of such a perception. John Locke, and this position was also held by David Hume, points toward a radical critique of knowledge itself, asserting that the mind consists of "impressions" and "ideas." For Locke, impressions are "ideas of sensation," perception of the physical world; ideas are images of impressions formed in thinking and reasoning. Thus, we cannot have an idea of a thing for which we have not acquired an impression, for what has not been perceived cannot be known.28 As Socrates states, "what man believes as a result of perception is true for him, therefore, man has his own beliefs."
The paradox of television is that it gives the appearance of being neutral while, in fact, it perpetuates alienation by controlling the viewer's perception. The Hill-Thomas hearings exposed the nature of the televised news presentation as one in which fragmented information is presented. Viewers were witness to the extraordinary ability of media to control events and manipulate public opinion. The fact that the sole purpose of the hearings was to evaluate Thomas' fitness to the Supreme Court, was not necessarily evident. The Committee failed to focus on Thomas' qualifications and character, by permitting the hearings to become an adversarial proceeding. Hill became the object of attack, instead of a potential bearer of information for use in evaluating Thomas' character. Some believe that this allowed the "Republican misdirection play" that "sneaked" Thomas onto the Supreme Court.29 The hearings were excellent theater combining the elements of politics, sex and race, playing out how mass media politics has reduced viewers to manipulated spectators, incapable of effective intervention or clear self-awareness.30
The media is constrained by business necessity, as well as the role of government policy in shaping the media system. Content and control of mass media have become issues of political debate. Current media work to preserve individual and established interests, as was exemplified in the Hill-Thomas hearings which were broadcast as an edited event. Sessions were supported with the commentary of anchors, reporters, lawyers and expert opinion makers. A narrative plot evolved from recaps, updates and summarized reports which were accompanied by selected footage. The Senate inquiry and media coverage, by focusing on the soap opera aspects of the case rather than analyzing the testimony of witnesses, promoted the notion that there was no way to prove the truth. The commentary of network news teams was routinely framed to fit the White House perspective, which contained and limited the agenda of the hearings. Network news teams addressed the administration's concerns of managing an "unregulated" media event while preserving authority and privilege on the part of news commentators, senators and the administration.
When the Hill-Thomas confirmation hearings reached their pinnacle, television became an electronic arbiter for the nation, its arena for viewing the unresolved issues of racial and gender justice. The hearings were a media event as well as a legal event, with the spirit of the law present with its ideological effects. Hill-Thomas could have been another popular genre segment to add to the attention that broadcast television devotes to legal culture, disproportionate relative to the infrequency of legal intervention in daily life. More than any other political event since Watergate, the televised hearings challenged the legitimacy of government by law.31
Information should not be taken at face value. One must question how and why the media came to be, why they have the shape and organization they do, how and for whose benefit they work. McLuhan has the distinction of having first encouraged the general public to think seriously about the impact of media technology on society. The effects of technology occur at the level which alters patterns of perception without resistance. It also means that media content, or the explicit message, explains far less about communication than the communicative impact of the technological medium as such, viewed in terms of its efforts on whole societies and cultures. As Eco points out, when the viewer is surrounded by a series of communications coming from various channels, the nature of the information is of little significance. Of importance, is the gradual, uniform barrage of information, where the different contents are leveled and lose their differences.32
As Said states, as one goes from simple perception to more complex social judgments the interpretive nature of experience becomes more significant. The further one moves from questions of truth that are restricted to observed static objects, the greater the interpretive influence.33 By questioning how existence limits and determines what we know and how modes of knowing and seeing determine our actions, we are led to a dimension of truth with profound ethical significance.34
Can freedom of expression and democracy of task be preserved, while maintaining a commitment to upgrade the integrity and quality of expression? Freedom is the source of the journalist's existence, prevailing upon the journalist to uncover the "essence of truth." For Heidegger, the "essence of truth is freedom," freedom to disclose information within the openness of an area of disclosure.35 Nietzsche states that the worth of man is constituted by an honest effort to seek the truth. Taking issue with those who by all attempts wish to uncover, to "unveil," Nietzsche argues that "we no longer believe that truth remains truth when the veils are withdrawn," we believe in words and appearance and do not look beneath the surface.36
As we approach the next millennium, journalism faces several social and economic problems that threaten to impact newsroom values and result in ethical confusion in certain ranks of the news industry. Andrew Barnes 1988, President and Editor of the St. Petersburg Times and Chair of the Ethics Committee of (ASNE) found that "mature and professional staffs" were unaware of distinct newspaper ethical policies, and some did not know whether their newsroom had a written code of ethics.37 Another major concern is the trend toward concentration of media ownership by conglomerates, and its effect on what will become of the principles of journalism when under pressure to maintain and improve the bottom line. New technology, media concentration, increased profits and competition all have had and will continue to have a major impact on journalism. The new information age demands expensively gathered and highly processed news. The social mission of journalism and investigative reporting requires a balance with the basics of news structured for an increasingly competitive media environment.38
Media reflect our culture and politics, and to understand the what, how and why of television is to begin to understand the complex, contradictory, confusing workings of society, particularly public life. The anticipators of the new information order must be aware that the same culture, politics and society that shaped television will also be shaping new technology.39 The intent of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's media lab, where the future of television is being developed, is "to transfer today's passive mass media, particularly TV, into flexible technologies that can respond to individual taste." The vision for the future of television is a highly personal and interactive information system which will accommodate the user's interest level, ability and mindset. Computers will not be passive instruments for the display of mass media's materials. They will understand context, abstract contents, and present information in accordance with their understanding of the user, schedule and mood. The next millennium will be one of personalized media.40
As Boorstin put it in 1962: "While we have given others great power to deceive us, to create pseudo-events, celebrities, and images, they could not have done so without our collaboration. If there is a crime of deception being committed in America today, each of us is the principal, and all others are only accessories....Each of us must disenchant himself, must moderate his expectations, must prepare himself to receive messages coming in from the outside."41