Jan 19
Tech, media, and Meta
A history of your illusionary power, and where its heading
Albeit with minimal reach, computers began their way into the lives of Americans in the early 70’s. Most know that this period came after a time of popular upheaval foreign to the U.S. Vietnam and its protests, civil rights, sexual revolution, psychedelics, and overall anti-establishment behavior. All these, largely crammed into one decade. Is it a coincidence that the major development of the following decade brought the computer into the public consciousness? Could be. I argue that it isn’t, and we’re seeing now in 2022 why that’s true.
Development of anything takes time. It’s no different for technology, computers specifically. When I say computer, I also mean its offspring and subsequent tech, such as phones, their applications, and social media. What’s understood of these devices of power are anything but. Seamless connectivity to anywhere in the world only comes at a cost. That price is oversight. If anyone cannot see the issue of communication under supervision, then you’re an individual of no consequence, the very data that technology doesn’t have to troubleshoot. You benefit from being domesticated in your entirety. This is good, because the moment you become a virus no place for you in the system exists.
Rarely is nuance tolerable in a fixed and successful mechanism. The success of a mechanism is judged almost solely on its relevance in the marketplace (i.e., what America is). It wouldn’t otherwise require our attention. Then the more concentrated technology focuses the attention of its users, the more their ability to divert from it becomes challenging. And as the great philosopher Roger Scruton once said, everyone takes a conservative stance on what they know best. A lot of effort must be done for such a situation to crystallize. The principle method of reaching this feat is to entertain. Media’s specialty is to do just that. Such a system began with the CBS radio program The March of Time in the 1930's.
The March of Time was a broadcast that based each of its program scripts off the latest edition of Time magazine. The show used a professional production with hired actors to reenact major world events. It was a hit with the public as it went on the airwaves, soon becoming a mainstay inside the homes of every living room. It gave families a sense of intimate connection to live events as they happened, something yet undeveloped anywhere else. Reenactments of revered figures such as FDR, Winston Churchill, Mahatma Gandhi, and others made appearances. As A. Brad Schwartz writes in Broadcast Hysteria, The March of Time was a kind of mix between “journalism and showmanship,” though this fact hardly influenced its listeners. To them, it was real. And when a popular consensus is formed on an item, be it anything from God to dietary benefits, it doesn’t matter if it’s real or not. It is real because of its impact on the culture.
Even still, however, the radio show almost faced a quick end due to expensive costs and advertising concerns, and eventually did indeed get canceled for a brief time. The decision was appropriately met with public protest because of the radio being seen as a public utility, like the telephone or electricity (or what the internet should be in 2022). But unlike the telephone or the electric, The March of Time’s public reception understood it as the best way to keep informed of domestic and international events.
As a result, its cancellation didn’t last. The program returned in answer to demand, and came with expected success, arresting the attention of America once again. By that point, though the show was officially registered as an advertising platform, the nation thought of it as a credible news source. Advertisers noticed. As Schwartz writes, it remained relied upon because of its “fakery in allegiance to the truth” style. “Unlike straight news commentary, which was allowed to be dry, The March of Time’s primary goal was to entertain. And of course, to sell magazines.” Mind you, to “entertain” is simply defined by holding someone’s curiosity. And entertain it did until its last broadcast in 1945.
What was worst outcome of The March of Time? Besides advertising showcasing itself in disguise as public news, the risk came from manipulating current events into “a kind of theater, by focusing on personalities rather than hard facts…it also mingled fact and fiction in a dangerous way, confusing public service with naked commercialism.” Media, entertainment, and news became indistinguishable, each more than willing to be in cahoots with another to be a successful mechanism in the marketplace. The birthchild of these three is what’s known as the “establishment.”
Tech in its modern form is a continuation of that blend. Technological development has had the benefit of continually remodeling itself to prove its worth to media, entertainment, and news. But it does something the former three couldn’t accomplish with their users. Tech provides the illusion of power, devices to isolate dissent in zoo-like fashion. The Metaverse is the latest rendition of that.
“we live in a time when the technology of human communications has advanced at blinding speed; but what people have to say to one another by way of that technology shows no comparable development.” Theodore Roszak, 1968
Unless government plans on sharing the virtual metasphere with every other avatar like you and me, you’d better believe that the point of such a creation is nothing more than a fancy pen for civilization. Social media gives the appearance of empowering its users. But it’s nothing more than a favor. Because it’s not a public utility, if you say something of consequence (as deemed by the establishment), you’re censored or removed. With the Metaverse? You misbehave, you’re out. That’s exactly the point: to further distance the world from dissent against the largest centralized power ever known. It’s here, folks.
Because you’ll be able to sit opposite of AOC at daytime brunch in the virtual space, such a world will do nothing but dull your political instincts. Understand that even during your supposed relationship with politicians, policy decisions and signings are going to remain on (the real) capitol hill. There’s no question. With that being said, let’s request some appropriate foresight of everyone as we glide into this new creation.
Maybe begin by asking yourselves, what is that I would need from such a development? Who benefits? Is this what I really want to do as I age? Will it be a life well-lived as you self-reflect in your last years and days? It’s reasonable to think from a position of fear on something so impactful. If we don’t do it ourselves, the media establishment will step in to convince us with yet a stronger form as they always do. The difference being only in tactics. They will scare us into submission that Meta is safe. These messages will come by way of the avatars of Anderson Cooper and Don Lemon, who you’ll also be able to join for daytime brunch.
