I do agree with Marshall McLuhan’s idea that the medium is
the message. The medium in which a message is delivered can affect two things
(in my eyes) who it is received by and how it is perceived. For instance, messages
that utilize more new media and that use more electronic/technological channels
may be better received by younger generations as people my age and younger are
more familiar with the informational and digital age. Messages that use social
networking sites, smart phones, and television are not only perceived as being
more trendy, but they are used more often by my generation and my preceding
generations. While messages that use more old media, i.e., print media and
radio may be better received by older generations as that is what they are more
accustomed too.
In
terms of cool media, I do see television as being cool media as you need to
have a certain level of attractiveness and charisma to be well received by the
audience. While in radio or print looks don't really matter.
WobbledyWa,
ReplyDeleteI like the relation you link between new media and age with regards to medium. I agree with your assesment to a certain extent. I do believe that medium has an impact on the way it is perceived but I'm not convinced on how much. For instance, one would think that when you break up with someone it should be done face to face right? Well if you ask around you will find out that more often people are texting break up messages or just simply switching their Facebook status to single. Another example is the fact that many people, including myself, text our bosses important messages all the time. Just last week I texted that I am sick and can't make it to work and he replied, "Cool, rest up and get better." I believe the line on which we balance important messages with the medium or context in which we receive them is becoming more and more blurred as we progress as a society.
-JPP