This kind of statement may seem hyperbolic at first; however, after careful consideration, we all have to admit that we can think of plenty of examples to support his conclusions. Still, Postman seems a bit extreme on this point. Is this some kind of Luddite evangelism, some kind of paranoid prophesying, or was he expressing legitimate fears?
Having read his study, I find his warnings warranted. Regardless of your feelings on that point, though, I think we can agree with his central contention that trends in TV and digital media have an enormous impact on public discourse and education and that these trends are, for various reasons, often contrary to the needs of the public.
Another point I think we can all agree on is Postman's assertion that educators need to play a forcefully proactive role in making sure that entertainment and media don't influence education, but rather that education informs entertainment and media. He notes, "it is an acknowledged task of the schools to assist the young in learning how to interpret the symbols of their culture. That this task should now require that they learn how to distance themselves from their forms of information is not so bizarre an enterprise that we cannot hope for its inclusion in the curriculum; even hope that it will be placed at the center of education" (163).
As we begin to develop and rework lessons to incorporate media, I think we need to keep Postman's prophecies in mind. Whenever we implement film or news or any other type of media, our intent should be to produce critical consumers of media, not the type of passive partisan puppets that are fueling the pseudonews polluting the airwaves right now.
Are we headed for a Huxleyan future? That might be a bit of a stretch. Still, it's best to err on the side of caution, right?
I have often wondered whether it would be a good idea to assign Postman as a text for this course to create a counter discourse. I consider his prophecies when I shape this course and wonder how we can best prepare our students to think critically in spite of the urge to become passive in the ways we interpret media texts. Thanks for the thoughtful counterpoint!
ReplyDeleteMatt,
ReplyDeleteThis was a fascinating read for me. Thanks for pulling such a powerful quote from Postman’s book. I spent a great deal of time thinking about my response to this, and I found that I was stuck on this idea:
“Another point I think we can all agree on is Postman's assertion that educators need to play a forcefully proactive role in making sure that entertainment and media don't influence education, but rather that education informs entertainment and media.”
I am not sure I totally agree here. While entertainment and media could certainly have negative influences on our educational system if we let them, much of our discussion in class has been about reshaping the way we educate to be more in tune with the culture that imbues our students. To some extent, shouldn’t we let our entertainment and media influence education?
I suppose this kind of thinking elicits the questions: Just how much influence is too much? Where do we draw the line?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI have issues with Postman.
ReplyDeleteHis division between text-based and image-based societies marks a difference, a change from the prominence of one media to another that will of course change the nature of the interaction we have with it, but...
... in the matter of what we get from it... I summon Socrates to the bench for his perspective that writing would ultimate obscure the truth from us because it comes second-hand, and can be misinterpreted, as opposed to hearing it from the mouth of the teacher him/herself: "And now, since you are the father of writing, your affection for it has made you describe its effects as the opposite of what they really are. In fact, it will introduce forgetfulness into the soul of those who learn it: they will not practice using their memory because they will put their trust in writing, which is external and depends on signs that belong to others, instead of trying to remember from the inside, completely on their own. You have not discovered a potion for remembering, but for reminding; you provide your students with the appearance of wisdom, not with its reality. Your invention will enable them to hear many things without being properly taught, and they will imagine that they have come to know much while for the most part they will know nothing. And they will be difficult to get along with, since they will merely appear to be wise instead of really being so.”
(Plato; Cooper, John M.; Hutchinson, D. S. (2011-08-25). Complete Works (Kindle Locations 16317-16322). Hackett Publishing. Kindle Edition.)
Hmmm. Sounds familiar doesn't it. Our challenge is indeed in interacting with the media, but I think there are centuries of support for the argument that writing can indeed present the truth as well as oral speech, and according to some people (Derrida comes to mind) all of our existence may be a form of writing, the kind of interaction that we engage in with our media, and the kind of understanding we can have from it. Likewise, whatever media becomes for us will likewise change how we interact with it, and the form our understanding takes, but I hesitate to feel the kind of trepidation Postman feels, that Socrates so accurately mirrors hundreds of years ago.
(PS, I hate the lack of an editing option on this blog)
I agree that Postman is a bit severe on some points. Keep in mind that he was proposing these theories prior to the proliferation of computers. Cell phones were a figment of the imagination when he was developing his ideas. You make a good point in comparing his concerns to Socrates' fear of the written word. Still, I don't know if it's entirely analogous. I would argue that the shift from a text-based to a primarily image-based system is more severe and in some ways fundamentally different than a transition from an oral tradition to a written tradition. It seems that Socrates' fears were fairly unwarranted as a text-based system of transmitting information still requires serious intellectual engagement. An image-based system, however, doesn't require the same level of mental exertion. And its that lack of mental exertion, Postman is arguing, that is pushing us in the direction of the Huxleyan future. There's no doubt that he's using a bit of hyperbole here, but the idea at the core of his statement is pretty compelling.
DeleteI agree with Kirsten on questioning the following quote:
ReplyDelete“Another point I think we can all agree on is Postman's assertion that educators need to play a forcefully proactive role in making sure that entertainment and media don't influence education, but rather that education informs entertainment and media.”
Educators can never escape the powerful influence of entertainment and media. With every technological invention, our bodies change (for both better and worse) to adapt to these factors. Take the human brain for example. Hundreds of years ago, people had very little forms of entertainment, but one thing they could do to pass the time was memorize and retell stories. This focus on memorization influenced the way schools operated. Students would spend hours upon hours memorizing and repeating subject material. As time progressed, however, prevalent access to high speed Internet made memorization increasingly less important. With immediate access to unlimited information wherever we are and whenever we need it, the ability to memorize complex things has become almost entirely obsolete. In today's most modern education theories, rote memorization has become a taboo practice with supposed detrimental affects on student learning.
Although everyone is influenced by entertainment and media, I do agree that teachers have a unique duty to try to step back and help open their students' eyes to the ways digital media silently affects them. Like Plato's Allegory of the Cave, the teacher must become a philosopher-like figure who breaks their students free from the chains of digital media, allowing them to turn around and see the actual figures behind them creating the distorted representation of reality--the shadows on the wall.