Sunday, January 26, 2014

Paige Barbour- The Ever-changing Idea of Progress



After reading chapters one and two of Slack and Wise’s “Culture and Technology: The Received View,” the main idea that I was stuck on was about how the definition and ideas behind progress have changed over time. Now, as demonstrated in this reading, there are new terms to further break down the ideas behind progression such as “Technological Progress” (p. 23). This is the idea that links new technologies with progress; however, my main question is that do people actually see “progress” as it is happening, or is it defined as progress when we look back on it?
                When thinking of new technological progress, I automatically thing of smart phones and social media. There is much to be debated if these are actual progress or if they are hindering humanity in different ways. Some say that communication is improved between people because distances do not appear as far online as they are in “real life.” Yet, others believe that communication between people is being made worse because face to face communication is being lost as technology keeps improving. There have been many types of technology along the way that can be seen as improvements and progressions from the past. Telegraphs, phones, television, and internet are all examples of technology that have been marked as progress from the past. Yet, these things were all met with resistance when they were first introduced. For example, the television was seen as harmful because it was damaging for reading capabilities, and today there are still some reservations about exposing people to too much TV, but the product as a whole is seen as progress because of the industry it has created.
                A specific section on page twenty-three in the reading was talking about politics and I could not help but think about the role of technology in politics. In the 1960 election for President, John F. Kennedy and Lyndon B. Johnson held the first televised Presidential Debates. This was a major progression, but it was not immediate. Research shows that the debates did not have an enormous impact on the election, but they did impact the idea of creating a public image and using media exposure. This can be seen as a progression because Presidential Campaigns have more substance and parts to them now; however, it can also be seen as a distraction from the issues that are being passed over to keep up a "fake façade" of a TV image of the person research is saying people would most likely vote for.
                Another example that is within politics is the past election. Barack Obama was discussed numerous times for “tweeting” information and promoting himself on Twitter. This is a new tactic used by a politician and many thought it was ingenious to take part in such a relevant mean of communication; whereas others think that it is unprofessional to have a twitter account and be running for President of the United States. Also, a recent “scandal” that took place was the selfie taken at Nelson Mandela’s funeral with Barack Obama, Danish Prime Minister Helle-Thorning-Schmidt, and British Prime Minister David Cameron. Forbes posted an article discussing a different side of this story, that being the social ramifications of this selfie between prominent figures at a funeral. The article explains how yes, this act is wrong, but they go on to write that this event is a perfect example of how society does not know what is going to happen in 2014. A year ago, I don’t believe anyone would have imagined a news story would be Obama taking a selfie at a funeral, but on a different topic, before the iPhone, no one imagined what it would be like to have a phone with music, a camera, email, internet, and phone capabilities. I do not believe the selfie in this case is in fact a progression, but it can be seen through this example that something may seem strange at first and find glory in time. 
              Now the question that is left is to look at these things and try to explain what is progress and what is not. I think what Slack and Wise were trying to say is that there is no true definition of progress because it is always changing as time, inventions, technology, culture, and people change.
                Overall, I think it is extremely hard to try and define progress because of the numerous opinions in the world. Progress is not definitive and may not even be visible until time has passed. For example, movies have progressed in such a short time from silent films, to tapes, to DVDs, to Blu-ray DVDs. We can see the progress today because all of the steps are visible, but when each was released the possibilities were not known. HD DVDS were produced for a few years and were competing with Blu-ray DVDs; but, they never caught on. This product of technology can be seen as a failure because it was unsuccessful or it can be seen as a progress because new types of technologies were being tried. Thus, it is extremely hard to define the ever-changing aspect of life know as progress.

2 comments:

  1. I think it's most important when talking about progress to define what context you're talking about progress in. The context will determine if it really is progress. For example, as it relates to technology, the cell phone is an example of progress in the sense that it is more convenient because you can talk to people anywhere. However, it is also a regression in face to face communication because people no longer need to be face to talk to each other, so it can cause them to not develop as many interpersonal skills as they should.

    I think we people say progress they are referring to progress in becoming more convenient. And while some may argue that it is causing humans to become lazier, I do not think it is necessarily a bad thing to make nation and world wide communication an easy task. The question really becomes, are you ok with this advance in telecommunication and the way it is devaluing face to face conversation, but also creating numerous opportunities in the business and social world because people are more connected? In my opinion, this technology is in a good thing, because although people are not talking face to face as much, they still learn face to face communication in places like school and at home, so there is still at least some aspect of that type of communication. This new communication has made talking to people all over the world, and has been advantageous in creating a global economy. To me, the benefits out way the negatives as far as this type of progress goes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I like the way you addressed the importance that technology plays in creating an 'image' in politics. It makes me wonder whether or not image is more important than qualifications and job skills. If one can create the illusion of competence, is he or she competent? While I am glad that technology allows individuals to get their message out and promote themselves, but I wonder if a candidate is great because of pure knowledge and skill or the skill of a PR team that grooms them for success.

    Also, I liked your commentary on the selfie. The selfie has allowed the contemporary american to enhance his or her narcissism. While I realize that taking a selfie at a funeral is disrespectful, especially at Nelson Mandela's funeral. I think this story has been completely blown out of proportion. Regardless, I think you are right in your comment that no one would have foreseen a scandal of this nature if we did not have the progress of the smart phone. From the perspective of a person 20 years ago, having all this technology at the palm of a hand is incredible and is undeniably progress.

    ReplyDelete