Writing on McLuhan's The Medium is the Message

McLuhan states that “the medium shapes and controls the scale and form of human association and action.” “The content or uses of such media are as diverse as they are ineffectual in shaping the form of human association.” “Indeed, it is only too typical that the content of any medium blinds us to the character of the medium.”(McLuhan) So, the medium carries the message, which stores the content and without the medium there can be no content and therefore, eliminating the message?

I liked the example he gave of the electric light and baseball at night. McLuhan said that it can be argued that the night baseball could be the content and then he went on in saying that without the electric light, there would be no night baseball. This reiterates the point of without the medium, there can be no content. Although I can see this point, it is possible to play baseball at night without light. Someone may get hurt, but it can be done. But, does this point make the case for the other point? If there is no light (the medium) there can be no night baseball (the content), but if there is no light and there is night baseball, does this mean that the baseball in itself becomes the medium? Later on in the writing, McLuhan states that it is not till the electric light is used to spell out some brand name that it is noticed as a medium. Then it is not the light but the content, which is also another medium. (McLuhan)

So, the medium is the message. Our cell phones, computers, and even possibly the iPod’s are new media’s form of mediums. Without these, the messages or content that we receive are reduced. And just because we are in a culture of new media rather than old media, the concepts haven’t changed according to McLuhan. Without books, there can be no book content. The medium is the message.