- I do not agree with McLuhan’s idea that the medium is the message. I see his theory holding somewhat true as important events may be downplayed, but that is the communicators fault, not the medium. I don’t believe that the medium itself such as, television, radio, newspaper or internet, determines how the message is understood or translated by the audience. I believe that the communicator is definitely the main cause for any miscommunication and/or misunderstanding no matter which medium you use to relay a message.
- There is a comparison made on page 24 regarding the signing of the Treaty of Ghent; that took nearly two months to spread the information and the death of Princess Diana and the news being immediate. I am sure that they are trying to reference the way technology is more expedient now days than before but I don’t think the examples they used are comparative.
- Explain Multiple Function further…
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
Notes for Class- Tamara Minley
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Referring to your first statement I would have to disagree. The communicator says something but based on the form of medium used, the communicators message may be taking completely out of text based on the medium... for example... the way you say something in a text message may have been meant to be funny, but the audience/person may take it as sarcasm or attitude. someone say i love u or i cant do this, in person comes off totally different in an email or text... The medium plays a huge role on the message. I may get one thing out of a commercial and you may interpret the commercial different, but the communicator said what they wanted to say. my point being all factors play a huge role in the message, but the medium plays a huge part as well.
ReplyDelete