The current media landscape poses a threat to the fundamental principles of freedom and democracy. Democracy worldwide is showing signs of regression towards autocracy/oligarchy, as predicted by Plato in “The Republic”. Meanwhile, a group of newborn technocrats seems to “co-opt” with these autocrats/oligarchs. This situation can be likened to a hunting ground where wolves prey on flocks of sheep, with the lion and antelope analogy no longer applicable.
A media revolution and reconstruction is pressingly needed today more than ever. In this blog, I first touch on the term "medium" to set the tone for further analysis, then show how today's media landscape endangers the very aspects of people's lives.
(In my following blog Part 2, I contend that a new paradigm of decentralized media is urgently needed and pursuable.)
When people talk about "media," they usually allude to things like news, social media, film & television, music, and other fascinating things that have become ingrained in our daily lives. However, most people don't realize that when they refer to all of these things as simply "media", they are actually referring to two things: the content and the medium.
The content is the information itself, while the medium is the technology that delivers the content. The content is my blog that you are looking at, and the medium is written language. Writing is a technology, the most influential, and when words are written, writing is the medium that carries the written words. The technology becomes the medium when it is placed in the socio-cultural context.
(In McLuhan’s thesis, any technologies can be considers medium, or technology, in a way, is medium. He even argues lightbulb is a medium. Medium discussed under the context of this blog, nevertheless, don’t require this degree of generalization)
"The medium is the message" - Marshall McLuhan
In saying this, McLuhan (who, by the way, prophesied the World Wide Web thirty years before it happened) reminds people that the message of the content has always hidden the real message of the underlying medium, and it is the medium that we should examine.
As technology revolutionizes and bypasses time, the medium, along with the world, is constantly in the state of metamorphosis. When savage start talking for better survival, society and civilization come into being; when writing emerged, law and property started being documented; when pope use the creation of printing press in 15th century to spread religion, he did not anticipate that it would later lead to “God is dead” emancipations . The transformation of medium shapes the history into the world we live right now, the bedrock of politics, culture and society.
We are currently in the midst of the information revolution, and understanding how changes in the medium impact society is crucial. To illustrate this, let me provide a brief chronology (focusing only on medium evolution from the 15th century to today):
The age of print began with the emergence of newspapers and tablets. The printing press made knowledge in written form accessible to more people, not just the powerful and wealthy. Printing costs decreased, making education more affordable for middle-class families. During this time, knowledge became more accessible, leading to increased literacy and educational reforms. This paved the way for advancements in the arts and sciences, religious reformations, and later the Renaissance. Additionally, new political philosophies spread, revolutions occurred, and monarchies were overthrown. This was the first and most impactful democratization of information.
The next came with the dawn of the telegram, which allowed information to cross boundaries of space and time. The transmission of information no longer relied on traffic, but on cable. Authorities around the world could send and receive information instantly. When the Titanic sank in 1912, the world knew within a day. Business and politics became global affairs.
Subsequently, broadcasting flourished, and radio and television were widely adopted. It is the dawn of mass media. Information is no longer limited to written form, but can also be disseminated through audio and visual channels. Unlike reading, which requires a deep level of abstract thinking, listening and watching are more easily understandable and persuasive. Mass media is an ideal tool for political propaganda and social integration, reaching a wider reach to national citizens.
Now we finally plunge into the age of digitalization, the age we live in. The Internet bubble truly gathers most of the world in a "global village". All the media we have discussed so far have been digitized, and more media have been built on top of them. Social media have transformed writing into tweets, images into Instagram, videos into TikTok (I'm referring to their original functions). Technologies for transmitting information that used to exist only in sci-fi literature are no longer pure fantasy, but foreseeable reality. Artificial Intelligence is booming; Mixed Reality is being increasingly adopted ; Brain-Computer Interface is under research and experimentation.
Wow, sounds like the future can't get any utopian-er?
Not really. The future, seems to me, looks more like the dystopia in 1984 or Brave New World.
🎶 …No thoughts to think, No tears to cry, All sucked dry, Down to the very last breath, Bartender what is wrong with me, Why am I so out of breath, The captain said excuse me ma’am, This species has amused itself to death, Amused it self to death… – Roger Water, “Amused to Death”
As said before, McLuhan warns that the message in the medium is always overshadowed by the content. People don't realize (or too lazy to do the thinking) the effects of the medium while consuming the content.
"The medium is the metaphor" - Neil Postman
Expanding on McLuhan's motto, Postman argues that the dominant medium of a time acts as a metaphor for how public think and communicate at that time, and how society functions. His thesis was proposed shortly after the golden age of television (in United States). Postman criticizes television as a medium that contaminated society at the 80s. Using McLuhan's spectrum from "cold" to "hot" medium (think of the degree of sensual stimulation from low to high and the mental exercise required from high to low), he asserts that our society is boiling due to the technicality of television, as these waves of heat corrupting people's ability to think. Combining the instantaneous flow of telegraph and the descriptiveness of picture, television creates an overwhelming zone of immersion which hardly requires any abstract thinking or logic. Postman thus claims that the age of reason, the spirit of seriousness, has gone, and human society enters the age of entertainment, which poses an existential threat to society.
Had Postman lived to see this day, he would have laughed bitterly. The situation is far more pernicious and complex than he thought. Below I examine four main phenomenons.
At the moment, the amount of information and data produced by all human beings in one day is greater than the sum of all the information produced before the mid-20th century (also before Information Age). Even if a person consumes information all day, all his life, he/she cannot finish the amount of information produced daily before death. Information is anytime, anywhere, eating away the hearts and minds of people and the workings of society.
How does this overload occur? In the past, information was often limited to local areas, and it is hard to produce widely-distributed 'legitimate' information, as it requires significant time and effort. Information remains in its original language unless translated. Most mainstream cultural products, such as books, music, and movies, undergo a lengthy process from production to distribution.
Now with the Internet, people can see information from anywhere and in any language (of course there is censorship, but there’s also VPN). Translation tools take down the walls of language barrier. People don't have to write a book or make a movie to spread ideas, a Tweet/TikTok will do, and search engine and algorithms have done the job of marketing and distribution. 1% effort required to produce same amounts of content compared to previous decades.
This information overdose leads to a constant state of partial attention, reduces people’s ability to focus and comprehend. This scattered focus exacerbates mental health issues, as the pressure of constant FOMO leads to feelings of anxiety and depression. It has also led to a flood of information of varying quality, making it harder for individuals to identify accurate and useful information. This confusion can lead to misinformed decisions and beliefs, as individuals tend to retreat into echo chambers, reinforcing pre-existing views and deepening societal divides. This, in turn, exacerbates social and political polarization and revives the "cancel culture" worldwide.
Postman uses a concept called the "information-to-action ratio" to define the amount of information consumed versus the amount of action taken in the context of given medium. He posits that the amount of information available to a person far exceeds what that person can meaningfully process or act upon. In the context of television, and now applicable to the Internet, this leads to a situation where people are inundated with information, meanwhile increasingly unable to do anything meaningful with it.
Information centralization is dual-faceted.
On the one hand, large technology companies now monopolize the infrastructure layer of information. Google's search engine takes over 90 percent of the total market share. Meta's social media takes over 75 percent of the total market share. Amazon dominates e-books and e-commerce in the US. The Big Seven dominate the newspaper industry in the US (worse in other nations with state-controlled media). The same tendency can be found in music, art, film/TV, and most platform businesses. The list goes on and on.
The big tech companies have capitalized on network effects, creating a self-perpetuating cycle that attracts even more users. With significant first-mover advantages, these tech companies secure vast amounts of user data early on, which they've used to improve their services and lock in users. In addition, their economic power allows them to pursue aggressive acquisition strategies, buy out potential competitors, and deploy resources in ways that smaller companies cannot match. This is most evident in Meta's strategy of acquiring most potential competitors before they become a real threat. This has resulted in a few companies controlling a significant portion of the digital infrastructure, from search engines and social networks to cloud services and beyond.
The effects of platform dominance are profound and far-reaching. It reduces competition and innovation, as smaller companies and startups struggle to compete in a market where a few giants have significant advantages. For consumers, this dominance can lead to fewer choices and higher prices for services. In addition, with access to vast amounts of personal data, these tech companies can use private information for targeted advertising or potentially more nefarious purposes. Platform dominance can also influence public discourse, as these companies have the power to censor or promote certain content, put democracy and free speech at risk.
On the other hand, governments around the world are imposing varying degrees of surveillance and information control on their citizens. Indeed, Leviathans (States) have always done this throughout history, and while there has been progress towards greater individual freedom, many powerful states are currently regressing in this regard.
Governments are using surveillance and control measures to monitor potential threats, suppress dissent, and maintain control over the narrative within their borders. The rise of digital technologies has provided governments with new tools to monitor and control the flow of information, including internet censorship mechanisms and mass surveillance programs. These measures are often justified on the grounds of national security or public order, but they can be used to stifle opposition and control public opinion.
Such control can have a chilling effect on freedom of expression, as individuals and organizations may self-censor to avoid repercussions. It undermines democratic processes by restricting access to information and limiting the diversity of viewpoints available to the public. Government surveillance can undermine privacy rights and create an environment of constant monitoring. This not only affects individual liberty but can also stifle innovation and economic freedom, as businesses may be hesitant to operate in a heavily state-intervened economy. Ultimately, government control and surveillance of information can lead to a less vibrant and uniform society where dissent is discouraged and conformity is enforced. This is exemplified by the Bolsheviks.
Taken together, the dual facets of information centralization through platform dominance and government control pose significant challenges to the ideals of an open, democratic society.
This is a issue that have been covered in previous sections but requires particular scrutiny. Misinformation, of course, is not a new topic. It is, one might even say, part of human nature, if one argues that deception is sometimes necessary for individual survival. What makes it a particularly troublesome today is that the repercussions of digitized misinformation are a hundred thousand times greater than they were before the Information Age.
The ease of creation and rapid dissemination lead to the proliferation of misinformation in Information Age. Digital technologies, particularly artificial intelligence nowadays, have made it significantly easier to produce false content. With minimal effort, almost anyone can generate convincing fabrications and hoaxes using tools that alter images, videos, and texts. The distribution mechanisms of the digital era, particularly social media platforms, exacerbate the spread of misinformation by prioritizing engaging content over veracity. Misinformation is often sensational and provocative, making it more likely to be shared and liked. This leads to wider audiences and faster spread. Some platforms may unintentionally promote misinformation through their algorithms or for profit, as engagement drives advertising revenue. This combination amplifies its impact far beyond anything possible in the pre-digital age.
Misinformation can cause confusion, misinformed decisions, and erode trust in authoritative sources of information. The constant stream of conflicting messages can lead to cognitive overload, making it difficult for individuals to distinguish truth from falsehood. As previously mentioned, confirmation bias, exacerbated by echo chambers, further entrenches divisions within society.
Misinformation has alarming consequences on a societal scale, potentially undermining public health initiatives, as seen in Covid-19, which can lead to misjudgments and unnecessary deaths. Misinformation can jeopardize the integrity of democratic processes by spreading false narratives about candidates, voting processes, and election outcomes. It can also incite violence and social unrest by fomenting hatred, mistrust, and paranoia among different community groups.
While misinformation is not a novel phenomenon, its amplification in the digital age presents unprecedented challenges that threaten individual well-being and societal stability.
Most syndromes of "information slavery" has also been covered in previous section. However, it is an imperative issues that is often ignored by public.
What I mean by "information slavery", and most Internet users don't realize, is that the current system underpinning the Information Age is obscurely exploitative, and users are slavery-like online. While the world has transformed from monarchy to general democracy over thousands of years, the newborn digital world is still far from democracy. If I were to use a historical period as an analogy, I would compare the current Internet with the colonial era.
Just like the old colonialism, users, often unknowingly, are subjugated to the economic and control interests of tech giants and governments. The initial promise of the Internet as a liberating, democratic space has been significantly compromised by the encroachment of these powerful entities. Driven by the insatiable profit motive, tech companies have devised systems in which users' everyday activities, from social media interactions to online searches, generate personal data that can be monetized. Every time human uses any kind of electronic device, the so-called metadata is created. While most of it is garbage data, some of it can be mined and used by companies and institutions often without explicit consent and notification. This data, often freely provided by users without a clear understanding of its value, becomes the cornerstone of modern digital capitalism (or one can say techno-feudalism).
Moreover, through sophisticated tracking mechanisms, personalized advertising, and the commodification of digital footprints, companies exert a form of control reminiscent of colonial rule over individuals' online selves. Users, in turn, become "free labor," contributing to the wealth of tech giants through their engagement and content creation without receiving fair compensation or recognition. This exploitation is further compounded by government surveillance initiatives that work with or leverage private tech infrastructure to monitor and influence citizen behavior, reinforcing the dynamics of control and profit.
Just as colonial subjects were often unable to escape the economic and political structures imposed upon them, modern Internet users find themselves in a similar bondage - dependent on platforms and services that exploit their data and violate their privacy. This digital colonization, while less visible than historical precedents, is no less insidious and marks a critical area of concern in the quest for a truly democratic and fair digital future.
In sum, current media landscape is a real mess that threatens the very aspects of people’s everyday lives, of the functioning of democracy. What done must be done – things must change.
The contemporary media paradigm exhibits a trait of 'pseudo-democratization' which conceals its hypocritical substance behind the mere representation of decentralization and democratization. Major newspapers use a 'two-sided argument' template to hide their preconceived notions, while studios like Disney use DEI to camouflage their prejudices. Mainstream social media has decentralized the means of information production and consumption, in exchange for looting of value created by users and the exertion of power. A thief lurking in the shadows poses a greater threat than a robber in plain sight.
It takes a new force to lift the veil of hypocrisy, to save democracies on the brink of collapse, to lead people out of “the Cave” – decentralize media now!
Decentralized media neither rob nor steal. Built on principles of transparency, equity, and community governance, it ensures that the control and benefits of media production and consumption are equitably distributed among all participants. The road ahead is not easy, but the stakes are too high for complacency. Let us champion the cause of true decentralization, where media serves the many, not the few, and where our collective voices shape the narrative, free from the shadows of manipulation and control.
There are already many decentralists preaching in this barren land. Despite the treacherous road ahead and the difficulty of crossing network effects, all efforts and progress are worthwhile (AND I will explore these existing projects in my following blogs).
It is time to take action. If we do not wish to live in a future resembling that of 1984 or Brave New World, we must fight for our freedom.