Writing in 1991, Morley is impressively astute at analysing and predicting the relationship
between power and communication technologies leading up to and into the 21st century.
Although only briefly addressed, I appreciated the discourse around an ‘Information Gap.’
Morley himself seems unconvinced by such a deterministic appraisal, but with the power of
hindsight, I’d say the Information Gap has only increased. Since the 90s, most every
social function (talking, consuming, etc.) has been integrated into web space. Corresponding
to this shift, I believe there to be a proportional increase in difficulty of living without the
internet. Personally, I have found it nearly impossible with electronics to renew my drivers
license, let alone trying to schedule the appointment, fill out the survey, etc. without access
to web technology.
between power and communication technologies leading up to and into the 21st century.
Although only briefly addressed, I appreciated the discourse around an ‘Information Gap.’
Morley himself seems unconvinced by such a deterministic appraisal, but with the power of
hindsight, I’d say the Information Gap has only increased. Since the 90s, most every
social function (talking, consuming, etc.) has been integrated into web space. Corresponding
to this shift, I believe there to be a proportional increase in difficulty of living without the
internet. Personally, I have found it nearly impossible with electronics to renew my drivers
license, let alone trying to schedule the appointment, fill out the survey, etc. without access
to web technology.
Morley’s overarching purpose seems to be in elaborating the problems associated with bottom-
up and top-down research methodologies. This locates the piece for me as metacriticism of
the field of Media/Cultural Studies. He himself isn’t following the methodologies he’s
researching. Instead, he cites his previous research projects as well as many other scholars.
This sort of writing is illuminating for someone who is immersing themselves in the field because
not only does it send me to other papers and researchers, it teaches me their interrelations.
up and top-down research methodologies. This locates the piece for me as metacriticism of
the field of Media/Cultural Studies. He himself isn’t following the methodologies he’s
researching. Instead, he cites his previous research projects as well as many other scholars.
This sort of writing is illuminating for someone who is immersing themselves in the field because
not only does it send me to other papers and researchers, it teaches me their interrelations.
Morley looks at “micro-processes” and “macro-issues.” While it isn’t the same language as
top-down and bottom-up, it addresses the same problems of determinism and structuralism.
My follow up question would be: Does the paper change if instead of looking at how processes
of individual consumption affect systemic issues it looked at “macro-processes” and “micro-
issues.” The result might be some extended elaboration of top-down directives to individual
problems and behaviors.
top-down and bottom-up, it addresses the same problems of determinism and structuralism.
My follow up question would be: Does the paper change if instead of looking at how processes
of individual consumption affect systemic issues it looked at “macro-processes” and “micro-
issues.” The result might be some extended elaboration of top-down directives to individual
problems and behaviors.
One critique: As a result of the paper’s short length and overall density, I believe Morley
mischaracterizes and reduces some of the arguments he addresses. While he takes quotes
where he can, he hurts his argument for me through paraphrasing and elepsis.
mischaracterizes and reduces some of the arguments he addresses. While he takes quotes
where he can, he hurts his argument for me through paraphrasing and elepsis.
No comments:
Post a Comment