1.) The reading suggests that "as technology advances, so does the human sensory perception needed to receive it." However, technology continues to advance beyond the normal capabilities of human perception. For instance, video resolution is becoming almost indistinguishable from the real thing, and frame capture is available above a standard human's rate of 60 fps. If human sensory perception does evolve jointly to technological advances, do you believe humans to be able to break this visual limitations naturally without the use of surgical augmentation?
2.) Since Sony making the first portable video camera, the regular population has been given more and more power to influencing and generating media. It was no longer a right almost exclusive to the government or larger news networks. Today, it can even be argued that to the average American, government and large news network media is actually overshadowed by "at-home" generated media. An average American may not know what the big headline is in the news, but may be familiar with the latest meme trending the web. Between government and local/national news networks and the general population, who do you believe has the bigger media influence overall? Whereas in a government or local/national news network dominant culture censorship and other media manipulation is the main problem, what do you believe the problems of a people dominate news culture?
Humans are what they always be. I do not think it would be wise in a world with humans already coping with 'the internet' to augment themselves further. I think you point out a certain danger there : is it wise to create tools/tech that will operate at a speed faster than our perception? Could be a train wreck waiting to happen.
ReplyDeleteAn interesting question(s). It is almost about the 'will of the people' versus 'the will of the institution'. As erratic and propagandaish as they may be, there is no doubt that news and media institutions such as CNN and MSNBC will still be revered for their ability to put forth 'the facts'. Though the 'facts' are more truthful at times when it is interpreted with a social, 'will of the people' way. The answer is whom of the two is more powerful may not lie in binary, but compromise. The obvious answer : programs like the Daily Show and Colbert. They blend the two with detournement and satire. The news is presented but with a voice that connects to such a media saturated, internet driven world.