Expository Essay

50 shades of technological determinism

Kris Hodgson

University of Alberta

Dr. Gordon Gow

MACT program

Black and white characterizations of technology, a view that is either helpful or harmful,

is a shallow but common way of looking at our gadgets. Perhaps society prefers these extreme

feelings because it’s easier than looking deeper at the problem. It happens in politics, religion

and many other controversial subjects when people choose to avoid meaning in subtle nuances

that separate dichotomies. In her book “Personal Connections in the Digital Age” Nancy Baym’s

three dystopian views include “fears of losing control, becoming dependent and being unable to

stop change” (Baym, 2010, p. 28). When speaking about losing control Baym wrote, “the

automobile led to fears that teenagers would isolate themselves from their families” and “dime

novels spawned concerns about the intellectual development of their readers” (Baym, 2010, p.

33), but Baym’s dystopian portrayals discount how society can use technology to its benefit.

Merritt Roe Smith, (1994) speaks to this when he says, “the collective memory of Western

culture is well stoked with lore on this theme. The role of the mechanic arts as the initiating

agent of change pervades the received popular version of modern history.” Nancy Baym casts an

unfair polarized judgment on technological determinism. In this paper I will argue that Harold

Innis, Tim Wu and others are more subtle through their discussions on bias, monopolies of

knowledge and the trial of innovation.

Harold Innis is right when he says we play a larger role in shaping technology than Baym

lets on. He uses time and space-biased media to further explain how they help to create a stable

society. He writes that, “new media allow those on the periphery to develop and consolidate

power and ultimately to challenge the authority of the centre” (Soules, 2007). Innis adds that

time-biased media like stone and clay are durable, difficult to move and are associated with the

moral, customary and sacred. Space-biased media are light and portable like paper yet they have

a short lifespan. Those cultures that have succeeded throughout history are the ones that knew

how to use the space and time bias to their benefit. Counter to Baym’s idea of being unable to

stop change, people have used new technology to knock the power structure off balance through

the use of space and time-biased media. A historical example of this is Martin Luther’s 95

Theses, which challenged the Catholic Church. When this publication was widely distributed as a

time-biased media, it led to the Protestant Reformation. Shawn Fanning’s peer-to-peer sharing

service and space-biased media Napster shook up both national copyright laws and the music

industry’s slow evolution to digital. “Further instability from a lack of balance between time and

space media, as well as margins of the empire, can equally drive social change” (Soules, 2007).

But Baym is right when she writes that people assign symbolic meanings to technologies (2010

p. 23). She adds that the technology says as much about the communicators as they do about the

technology and this is ever so clear with Luther’s theses’ and Napster. Just like time and space-

biased media, monopolies of knowledge are challenged by citizens when they see a great

entrepreneurial opportunity that challenges existing technology.

Innis, (2007) describes monopolies of knowledge as places like universities that

commonly held onto the information disseminated to students. With the Internet and the global

distribution of peer-reviewed articles, these monopolies are challenged. Tim Wu’s exploration of

Henry Tuttle’s invention the Hush-A-Phone is another example of a monopoly of knowledge

where AT&T firmly held onto the seat of power through a federal government covenant it had

established. The Hush-A-Phone was a brilliant invention that kept conversations from being

overheard and while many saw this technology as advantageous compared to the existing flawed

system, AT&T was not happy. As Wu wrote about AT&T’s conditions, “no equipment,

apparatus, circuit or device not furnished by the telephone company shall be attached to or

connected with the facilities furnished by the telephone company” (Wu, 2011, p. 102). This

example Wu uses is a prime example in the “advantages and disadvantages of a monopoly” (Wu,

2011, p. 103). Baym’s three dystopian views are not taking into account people like Tuttle who

clearly knew what he was doing to challenge the existing technology. Monopolies of knowledge

enjoy the power they have as they amass it, but once the control becomes too great, citizens

respond. The trial of innovation is a third way that helps keep the monopolies in check as new

technology is created.

All three of Baym’s dystopian views are discounted when considering the work that went

on at Bell Labs. When considering Wu’s trial of innovation, William Ogburn writes cultural

evolution is based on four explanatory factors: invention, accumulation, diffusion and

adjustment: “People invent things either independently or by imitation and acquisition

(diffusion); these things accumulate, increasing the potential for more inventions; the appearance

of a new invention causes reactions in other parts of culture and, as society attempts to

reestablish equilibrium through adjustment, society also evolves” (Ogburn, 1950, Ch. 2). In

discussing the Bell Laboratories’, Tim Wu agrees with Innis in how citizens have the great

ability to develop new technology. The Bell Laboratories did not lose control of its

groundbreaking experiments; the scientists were guiding the change they wanted to see by

unleashing innovation. “When scientists are given such freedom, they can do amazing things and

soon Bell’s were doing cutting-edge work in fields as diverse as quantum physics and

information theory” (Wu, 2011, p. 104). Bell Labs was responsible for winning no less than a

remarkable seven Nobel prizes: this is not an example of losing control, becoming dependent on

technology or being unable to stop it as Baym writes. This idea of the trial of innovation can

even be seen in the global adoption of nuclear power. Germany’s chancellor Angela Merkel

proved that society does have a say in energy choice and technological advancement as she did a

180-degree shift in 2011. In the February edition of Environmental History, Hamblin writes how

Merkel wanted to phase out all 17 German nuclear reactors because of the Fukushima disaster in

Japan (Hamblin, 2012). This decision shows that a G8 superpower like Germany can willfully

change its trajectory when it no longer aligns with the wishes of its citizens for a cleaner energy

future.

While Nancy Baym casts an unfair polarized judgment on technological determinism, Innis and

Wu speak to media bias, monopolies of knowledge and the trial of innovation. These help to

show that technology can be shaped by its citizens. In closing I agree when Katz and Rice (2002)

write about the polarity of human nature in discussing new technologies by saying they are

integrated into everyday life as they offer a nuanced mix of both positive and negative

implications (Baym, 2010, p. 46). Technological determinism is not the guiding force that will

lead civilization forward, it is the citizens who understand that they can assume power by using

time and space-biased media, they can topple monopolies of knowledge like AT&T and Bell

Labs, like other groups of entrepreneurs working on a common goal like those at Google, can

continue to use the trial of innovation to unleash new technologies.

References

Baym, N. K. (2010). Personal Connections in the Digital Age. Cambridge: Polity. (pp. 22-45).

Hamblin, J. (February 22, 2012). Fukushima and the motifs of nuclear history.

Environmental History. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Katz, J. E. (2002). Social Consequences of Internet Use: Access, Involvement, and

Interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Ogburn, W. (1964). On culture and social change: selected papers. Chicago: University of

Chicago Press. Ch. 2.

Rowland, W. (2005). A modest proposal: the class-action case against television.

International Journal Of Media & Cultural Politics. 1(1) pp. 149-152.

Smith, M. R. (1994). Does Technology Drive History?: The Dilemma of

Technological Determinism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Soules, M. (2007). Harold Innis: The Bias of Communications &

Monopolies of Power. Retrieved from http://bit.ly/1JA49Dk

Wu, Tim (2011) The Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires. New York:

Alfred A. Knopf. pp. 101-114.