Skip to main content


"Our democracies would be in even more trouble than they already are if anyone voicing suspicion of mainstream media was dismissed as a conspiracy theorist. It would be a world where the far right has successfully monopolised the terms of media criticism."

- #SeanPhelan, 2022

https://www.rnz.co.nz/news/on-the-inside/462677/why-legitimate-criticism-of-mainstream-media-is-in-danger-of-being-hijacked-by-anti-vax-and-freedom-movements

#media #MSM #MediaStudies
In theory, we can now bring billions of minds to bear on the complex problems we face. Yet we live in an age of digitally amplified polarization and disinformation (I hope we can all agree these are problems). How can we learn to disagree gracefully? How can we teach that? We urgently need to create shared understandings of media, and how to use them in service of wellbeing. Especially if McLuhan was right that WW3 is an information war.

#media
By reducing economic inequality. Not everybody has the same stake in our society, and this leads to the existence of vastly different and irreconcilable social paradigms. Unfortunately no teaching is going to change that.
> By reducing economic inequality.

I agree inequality is a serious and growing problem. But how do we reduce it without the means to achieve a broad consensus on the exact nature of the problem and what actions to take to fix it? I don't see how we can solve our economic or ecological problems without solving our media problem.

Content warning: Long post

Thanks again for the detailed response. I suspect we're talking past each other, so I'm going to have a good think about what you've written and maybe reply later.
It's all good, thank you for acknowledging this, and take your time. Maybe I misunderstood your initial point as well.
I suspect the disconnect is in the ways we are defining "communication". When I wrote my original post I had in mind a very broad definition including all forms of media, broadcast and network, institutions like newsrooms etc. All the ways in which humans pass signals to each other to co-create meanings. But perhaps I confused things by giving examples specific to one-to-one or small group discussion (whether in-person or online)?
I agree that attempts to reform that narrow area in isolation from the rest of the communication landscape is unlikely to work. But it seems logical to me that the situation we're in was caused - at least in part - by the ways we've been communicating (or failing to) up to now. So I'm not sure why any other intervention would work if we attempted it by communicating only in those ways, without trying some new approaches. Does that make sense?
Yes, absolutely, thank you for the elaboration. Although I still don’t completely agree with you. I believe the current communication in a wide sense reinforces the current system because it was borne from it, but the current system hasn’t always existed under this form, so I expect any change in the system (whatever the direction of the change) to bring changes to communication as well.

For example, it’s been fascinating to me to witness the shift in communication about China as more and more of the major US companies started to depend on this fast-growing market for their income. From defiance and exoticism to unabashed pandering, US companies have stopped biting the hand as it started to feed them more and more.

So in my experience the system changes despite the self-reinforcing communication you described, which seems to make communication literacy secondary to enact any sort of changes. It’s definitely welcome, but perhaps not indispensable to any system-changing endeavors.
It occurs to me we may have fallen into a classic materialism vs. idealism dichotomy. Let me be clear, I'm not arguing that changing communication changes material (ie systemic) reality all by itself. Rather that improved communication can open up new possibilities for organizing to effect systemic change. These changes then open up new possibilities for communicating. At the macro scale, the two feed into each other. But communication is easiest to change at a human scale.
Thanks for revisiting the topic, I do fully agree with you this time.