MARSHAL MCLUHAN’S TECHNOLOGICAL DETERMINISM THEORY IN THE ARENA OF SOCIAL MEDIA

  • Azam JAN Department of Media Studies Hazara University Mansehra, Pakistan
  • SHAKIRULLAH SHAKIRULLAH Department of Archeology Hazara University Mansehra, Pakistan
  • Sadaf NAZ Faculty of Education Hazara University Mansehra, Pakistan
  • Owais KHAN Department of Archeology Hazara University Mansehra, Pakistan
  • Abdul Qayum KHAN Department of Archeology Hazara University Mansehra, Pakistan

Abstract

McLuhan (1964) proposed that mediated technologies ensure culture diffusion in a society which in turn helps change human behavior. He states, "We shape our tools, and they in turn shape us." Most of the scholars in the field talked about radio and television etc. as mediated technologies but McLuhan perceived a bit differently by including numbers, games and money as mediated. Regarding numbers, he held that every individual in a theater enjoys all those others present. This creates a mass mind which let elites to establish a profile of the crowd. The phenomenon in turn homogenizes the masses that are easily influenced.  McLuhan stated that games are media of interpersonal communication and extension of human social self. Games according to him “allow for people to simultaneously participate in an activity that is fun and that reflect who they are.” To him money is power that facilitates access. It is money that empowers people to travel the world and serve as transmitter of information, knowledge and culture. These mediated tools according to McLuhan turn the world into a global village.


The media of social networking exactly play the same role attributed by McLuhan with number, game, money along with traditional media of radio and television.  Social Media (SM) users make use of identical applications and undertake almost similar activities that turn them into a homogeneous mass. Likewise, online profiles reflect identity features and most of them consume SM to have fun. SM connects people across cultures, religions, and boundaries and let them feel members of a single community. SM has not only converted the world into a small village but also shaped every aspect of human social life.

References

[1] Abdulahi, A., Samadi, B., Gharleghi, B. 2014. A Study on the Negative Effects of Social Networking Sites Such as Facebook among Asia Pacific University Scholars in Malaysia. International Journal of Business and Social Science Vol. 5, No. 10.
[2] Allan, S., Thorsen, E. 2009. Citizen Journalism: Global Perspectives, New York: PeterLang.
[3] Ansgard, H. 2011. Network Journalism. Journalistic Practice in Interactive Spheres. NewYork. Routledge, 13.
[4] Boyd, D.M., Ellison, N.B. 2007. Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 13, 210-230. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x
[5] Castells, M. 2001. The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business, and Society, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
[6] Finnemann, N.O. 2002. Perspectives on the Internet and Modernity Late Modernity, Postmodernity or Modernity Modernized? In Brügger. N. & Bodker, H. (eds.). The Internet and Society? Questioning Answers and Answering Questions. University of Aarhus, 34-35. http://cfi.imv.au.dk/pub/
[7] Hardy, B.W., Scheufele, D.A. 2005. Examining differential gains from Internet use: Comparing the moderating role of talk and online interactions. Journal of Communication, 55, 71–84. DOI: 10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb02659.x
[8] Lenhart, A., Madden, M. 2007. Teens, Privacy & Online Social Networks. Pew internet and American life project report. Pattern of Facebook Usage and its Impact on Academic Performance, 28.
[9] Martin, P., Erickson, T. 2013. Social Media: Usage and Impact. India: New Delhi. Global Vision, 27.
[10] Park, N., Kee, K.F., Valenzuela, S. 2009. Being immersed in social networking environment: Facebook groups, uses and gratifications, and social outcomes. Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 12(6), 729-733. DOI: 10.1089=cpb.2009.0003.
[11] Postman, N. 2000. The humanism of media ecology. Proceedings of the Media Ecology Association 1, 10-16. [Electronic version, retrieved December 2, 2012 from http://www.mediaecology.org/publications/proceedings/v1/humanism_of_media_ecology.html.
[12] Putnam, R.D. 2000. Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. NewYork: Simon & Schuster.
[13] Safko, L. 2012. The Social Media Bible: Tactics, Tools & Strategies for Business Success. (3rded). New Jersey. Wiley & Sons, 39.
[14] Uricchio, W. 2009. Moving Beyond the Artefact: Lessons from Participatory Culture. In Boomen, M.V., Lammes, S., Lehmann, A., Joost Raessens, J., & Schafer, M.T. (eds). Digital Material: Tracing New Media in Everyday Life and Technology, 138. Amsterdam University Press.
[15] Utz, S. 2009. The (Potential) Benefits of Campaigning via Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 221–243.
[16] West, R., Turner, L.H. (eds). 2007. Introducing Communication Theory: Analysis and Application, (3rd ed.). McGraw Hill. New York.
Published
2020-12-27
How to Cite
JAN, Azam et al. MARSHAL MCLUHAN’S TECHNOLOGICAL DETERMINISM THEORY IN THE ARENA OF SOCIAL MEDIA. Theoretical and Practical Research in the Economic Fields, [S.l.], v. 11, n. 2, p. 133-137, dec. 2020. ISSN 2068-7710. Available at: <https://journals.aserspublishing.eu/tpref/article/view/5782>. Date accessed: 11 may 2021. doi: https://doi.org/10.14505//tpref.v11.2(22).07.