Use Innis’s Concepts of “Time-Biased” and “Space-Biased” Media and His Ideas on Oral and Written Media to Analyse the Internet

Birkerts provides three effects that will occur as a result of moving away from the printed word to the electronic media. The first effect is the language erosion. He explains the reader that transition from books will lead to the “complexity and distinctiveness of verbal and written communication, which are deeply bound to transaction of print literacy, will gradually be replaced by a more telegraphic sort of plainspeak” (9). In the future our language will start to become more simple and dumb. Whereas, by reading books and printed materials people are able to dig more depth and understand and imagine the contents. But, soon this will start to disappear as people will no longer be able to understand the complex language of the literature and intelligence level of people will start to decrease. The second effect of electronic media is the flattening of historical perspectives. This means that due to the electronic media the history will start to recede because the “printed page itself is a link” and when this link is broken the past will gradually diminish (10). Birkerts explains the audience that the past is best represented in the books and libraries. Therefore, moving away from the printed word means moving away from the past and its history. The last effect is the waning of the private self. Birkerts worries that in the future people will forget how to live because of the electronic

This paper will attempt to explain how the telegraph contributed to the development of mass media.

Wolf states that, reading on the internet promotes a style that puts “efficiency” and “immediacy” above all else, may be weakening our capacity for the kind of deep reading that emerged when an earlier technology, the printing press, made long and complex works of prose commonplace.

A huge beneficial effect of the Internet is time-efficiency because it no longer takes days to find research. Fortunately, it only takes a couple of minutes to do a few Google searches. Another benefit to the Internet, in comparison to the last example, is that it is a channel for most of the world’s information. For Carr, as for others, the Internet is becoming a universal medium. Lastly, it is probable that we may be doing more reading today than we did in the 1970s or 1980s, when television was a choice of interest. It is assumed that we may do more reading today because not only do we have access to a variety of texts, but also a numerous amount of ways of communicating. For example, social media accounts and text-messaging. A negative effect of the Internet is that it is chipping away capacity for contemplation. The Internet is

“The more they use the Web, the more they have to fight to stay focused on long pieces of writing” (Carr 773). Carr’s point is because people are using the web, it is making it harder for them to concentrate and process information. Carr and Turkle both suggest in their articles that people now have lost the ability to be able to concentrate and to be

Journalist, Clive Thompson in his book, “Smarter Than You Think”, specifically in the chapter titled, “Public Thinking”, published on September 12, 2013, addresses the topic of technology and argues that because of the internet, we are doing more writing now than ever. Therefore technology is helping us think publicly in new and improved ways. He supports this claim by asserting that there is an improvement in our writing, which is happening because of the “audience effect”, he then goes on to say that anything we write changes the way we think, and finally he talks about how the internet builds connections, which is essential to the spread of new ideas. Thompson’s purpose is to inform readers about how the internet is a tool being used to advance our society in order to encourage more people to partake in online, public thinking. He adopts a contemplative tone for his audience, the readers of The New York Times, and others interested in the topic of technology. It is my intention in this paper to analyze the author’s subclaims and use of rhetorical strategies.

There is no denying the incredible library of knowledge the internet has made readily available for all to use. Having such a resource is transforming modern society in many ways, as it brings insight and news across the world at a moment’s notice, all the while enhancing educational and technological advancements. However, according to Sven Birkets, an American essayist and literacy critic, in his essay, “The Owl Has Flown”, it is not without fault as observations are to be made on how this new resource has transformed people’s intelligence and wisdom. The author theorizes that the large, almost unlimited, library that is now being offered by services such as the internet, reshapes the public’s knowledge. Knowledge is transformed to be horizontal or insubstantial compared to the much deeper lateral understanding pertaining to older generations because of the amount of time they spent dwelling on a much smaller set of resources. This observation made by Birkets in the late 90’s is expanded upon, and modernized by Nicholas Carr, an American writer and author, in a more inflicting and self-reflecting article for The Atlantic magazine entitled “Is Google Making Us Stupid? What the Internet is doing to our brains”. Carr does not just blame the Google search engine in this claim, but the internet as a whole on how it impacts concentration and our ability to contemplate. These cognitive impacts are observed and explained in more scientific terms by Eric Jaffe, a regular Observer

Throughout the article, Carr consults with credible sources that agree with him and believe that the internet is forcing our brains to evolve to face the growing nature of the web. A media specialist who Carr consulted with admits that, “[M]edia [is] not just passive channels of information. They supply the stuff of thought,”(Carr 92) and as media evolves it ,”[shapes] the process of thought.”(Carr 92) Carr argues that media is demising our intellectual ability, his argument is aided by his appeal to logos. Carr cities many credible sources that support his argument, that the internet is diminishing our cognitive ability. Car quotes multiple researchers and fellow “friends and acquaintances — literary

In “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” (2008), Nicholas Carr maintains that the advent of the Internet has produced a shallow generation of information customers who lack the ability to deeply engage with and critically think about a text. To support the argument, Carr draws on personal and historical anecdotes and one scientific study. The purpose of Carr’s article is to open a dialogue about the potentially adverse effects the Internet could have on humans’ cognitive processes. Carr establishes an informal relationship with the audience, who are generally well-educated, upper-middle class individuals. Because the audience is educated, they are very capable of critically thinking. However, Carr’s use of other rhetorical strategies disarms them and detracts from the dearth of logos. His essay is rife with numerous unfounded premises, poor evidence, and logical fallacies. Because of this lack of logos is in a way compensated by including numerous appeals to ethos and pathos, the audience is likely to find the article persuasive unless they re-read the article deeply with a critical lens.

Clive Thompson and Neil Postman are authors who discuss specific mediums through writing. Postman writes about the television and newspaper and Thompson writes about the internet age. Both of these authors use the same approach on their respected mediums. In comparison they both have the same piece of writing. Comparing side by side, it reveals a bigger idea that the communication medium always outweigh the cons.

Birkerts explores this idea thoroughly, projecting almost a sense of fear at the thought of any changes to what was already present. “A change [was] upon us—nothing could be clearer” (Birkerts, 2), and the unpredictability of it seemed frightening as is. But beyond this fear, there was a sense of urgency. An urgent need to halt whatever was yet to come, or at least stall these progressions until the importance of physical text was completely established. Having “ co-managed a used and rare book shop in Ann Arbor, Michigan” (Birkerts, 1), the value of literature held to be astronomically important to him. This, however, seemed to be slowly not applying to more and more of the general population with every advancement we’ve made electronically. Shifts in popular methods of learning held as no surprise to him, especially since this had been the case multiple times throughout history.“ [In] Greece…[around] the time of Socrates, the dominant oral culture was overtaken by the writing technology, [while] in

The Internet has indeed changed how we read and think. But does that really matter? You can just Google for facts and figures but the human intelligence is determined on recalling our long-term memory. Creativity requires engaging our long-term memories, in order to create new and creative pathways and associations and by reading incessantly on the Internet, we scatter our minds, lessen our focus, and diminish our tendency. In his article “Mind Over Mass Media”

The 20th century has witnessed dramatic developments in the history of media communications as well as human society. During the first half of the last century, electronic media such as the telegraph, radio and television to name a few were invented and became prevalent. Afterwards, the internet came into being and developed at an unprecedented rate to the point where it is now widely accepted that human history has entered into an information age. As claimed by a number of scholars, the appearance of new types of media can bring about dramatic influences on living conditions. Among them, Harold Innis, pioneer in this area of communication studies, is influential, firstly by employing two dimensions to media, namely time and space, and

“Societies have always been shaped by media for communication, it is impossible to understand social and cultural change without knowledge of the workings of media even the alphabet is a technology that is absorbed by young children to learn to speak through communication. The digital age is changing the way we use our brains. Rather than store important facts, today we are more likely to store information about how to find those facts where a particular file is located on the computer, how to find an important webpage again.

Time and progression are usually concepts that are found to work in unison, and this connection is profoundly present in the development of technology. Human advancements in the creation of life altering machinery has taken leaps and bounds in terms of how it has altered society, yet one has to consider the effects these developments have on already existing methods of a functioning civilization. One example of this phenomenon is the expansion of journalism from a closely knit field providing the news to an entirely open platform, via the internet, offering anyone the chance to spread information with previously unheard of haste. Attempting to impede the ever extending hand of change is an impossible task; however, it leads to an interesting argument about the impact of information sharing—particularly concerning journalism—now that there is such a readily available line of communication that can reach near anywhere in the world. As knowledge now resides a few button clicks away it brings about speculation considering integrity of the author and information that are presented, both of which seem to have been further diminished by the vast range of who can offer news in this modern digital age.