the laws of media

McLuhan described how media (defined more or less as any extension of man's senses) effect our lives, and developed the laws of media to categorize the effects (the "messsage" of the medium) in 4 dimensions. Every medium ENHANCES something, OBSOLESCES something, RETRIEVES something, and upon reaching the limits of its potential REVERSES into a form opposite of its original form. By seeing this commonality between essentially all things, at least and especially all man-made things, we are made acutely aware of the "messages" of the media that surrounds us.

If several analogous media exhibit similar characteristics or effects, we might predict similar other characteristics or effects. By doing a side-by-side comparison, we probe the two media for their analogous effects, revealing hidden "messages" of the media. By revealing the hidden ground of these messages, we reveal other relationships and effects. This exercise may be revelatory, or it may not.

Newer media are less understood than older media. The "message" of the telephone is quite well known, while the message of the internet is significantly less well known. The message of the telegraph is completely understood, because it has been obsolesced. We have seen the telegraph come and go, and had plenty of time to analyze and understand the effect it had on our lives. We are only now starting to understand some of the first implications of the internet.

The thing that most people don't grasp about understanding media is that the same thinking techniques can be employed with all media just as effectively. We can analyze the four laws of media for a pencil just as easily as we can for the laptop computer. We may not find analyzing the pencil as interesting or revelatory as analyzing the laptop, or, even worse, we might find both exercises boring. The importance of understanding the laws of media become important when understanding the newest media, or those media that have not yet come into existence.

By doing this, we become aware of the emergent effects that new media will have on our lives, as they ENTER our lives.

As technology begins changing at an ever more rapid pace, we must sense these changes faster and faster, or else we will experience a great deal of stress as we make errors, waste money and resources, experience conflict with out groups, and fall into disarray in many areas of society.

Think of what changes have occurred in the last ten years. What about the last 20 or 100 years? You notice that technological changes are happening at an astonishing rate compared to 100 years ago. We, as humans have evolved too, but we are now seeing evidence that we are less and less able to keep up with the change. Today, millions of people suffer from anxiety, depression, other forms of mental illness and health problems related to the stresses of everyday life. Has technology really made the world a better place? Not if you measure the good of the world by human quality of life standards.

Maybe only from a western standard can such claims be made. Only by standards set by the wealthy minority of the world, can ANY such claims be even considered. All other societies were for the most part, better off before massive technological advances took place in the world.

Every major technological innovation is accompanied by significant effects. Some good, some bad. The magnitude of the effects caused are generally associated with the importance of the technology in a historical sense. Many technologies seen as generally "good" today are more likely to have commonly known positive effects and lesser known (or noticed) negative effects, and vice versa. We are more likely to think about what our cell phone does for our sex lives when it actually enhances it. If it only inconveniences you by ringing while you're in the shower or in a movie theatre, you're more likely to curse it. This is fairly obvious once you think about it, but can be revelatory when applied to lesser known media, or simply media that people haven't noticed lately.

What is the message of cigarettes? Well, first we can say that they increase (ENHANCE) relaxation and therefore social situations or other recreation. They also OBSOLESCE cigars, pipes, and perhaps other smokeable drugs. They REVERSE their positive effects through bad breath, sore throat and breathing difficulties. Over many years of smoking the positive effects collection REVERSE into serious health problems, like emphysema and lung cancer. What do cigarettes RETRIEVE? Well, it RETRIEVES the peace pipe, obviously, because it is a smoked tobacco. But by acknowledging this we notice that cigarettes retrieve more than just the fact that people smoke tobacco, but that they smoke it socially, they smoke it to relax and fulfill their spiritual and emotional needs through talking with others, philosophizing etc. Now that cigarettes are less socially acceptable, one might expect a return to other drugs or smokeable items in order to fulfill the need that cannot be fulfilled by cigarettes. And this is precisely what we have seen in the last couple decades. As cigarette use has declined in groups, the use of marijuana has increased. As has the popularity of cigars and pipes increased where it has been nearly wiped out by cigarettes in the years when smoking cigarettes became popular.

A trite example, perhaps, but illuminates the concept of the laws of media. All media follow the same pattern. As McLuhan said, "we shape our tools, and thereafter our tools shape us." The messages of powerful media like television and the internet are important to analyze in this light, for they shape our cultures and societies in powerful ways.

Media are mirrors of society (although some are freaky-funhouse-style mirrors), and offer great insight into who we are as people. When McLuhan said "the medium is the message" it was to remind us to look at the effects our media have on us, rather than focusing on the content of the media. In other words, if one is searching for reasons why the world is the way it is today, one might want to look AT the mirror, rather than IN the mirror.