I checked Google, and people have already said this, but… I’m going to say it again, because it’s true. And it doesn’t seem like anybody has put it as simply as I’m about to:
The Internet is not a medium.
The Internet is not a medium in the same way that newsstands, DVD racks, hard drives, briefcases or Tupperware storage bins are not media.
The end. Bye bye.
Edit: I thought I might as well link to the Google search results for “the Internet is not a medium“. Bleh. As if it makes me any more authoritative than not authoritative at all. Um, I went to university for New Media for a year until I realized I was too smart for that shit, since I’m a genius and all? Does that count?
Edit2: Library shelves are just about as media-y as the Interweb. Also, I’m a bad Canadian. Fuck Marshall McLuhan. Say anything about him in a comment and perish.
Edit3: Those Google results include a lot of sites that claim that “the Internet is not a medium for [suchandsuch]” (emphasis and suchandsuch mine). Fuck those people. Whatever the Internet is, I can do whatever the fuck I want with it, so there. Take that. Fuckfaces. It’s not for copyright enforcement. It’s not for business transactions. For literacy. For community, junk mail, advertising, entertainment, blah blah blah. It’s for whatever I want. I am the Internet.
The Internet is for me.
End end end.
New inventions require additional meanings for words!
New inventions require additional meanings for words!
Well, yes.
You see, though… the Internet is not a medium in the same way that a dump truck is not. The Internet is a series of tubes…
Well, yes.
You see, though… the Internet is not a medium in the same way that a dump truck is not. The Internet is a series of tubes…
Do you remember a lil remake you did of the song Logs…but with lag? Still got a copy of that anywhere on the interweb tubes?
Do you remember a lil remake you did of the song Logs…but with lag? Still got a copy of that anywhere on the interweb tubes?
Hm… I can’t seem to remember what you’re talking about. I’ve probably got whatever it is. I have archives back until the beginning of time.
Google Desktop found me an entire folder full of Marilyn Manson song parodies… But nothing about lag.
Hm… I can’t seem to remember what you’re talking about. I’ve probably got whatever it is. I have archives back until the beginning of time.
Google Desktop found me an entire folder full of Marilyn Manson song parodies… But nothing about lag.
It seems to be that no one is confused when they say that ‘the Internet is a medium’, just like no one is confused when they say that ‘film is a medium’. In the latter case, I am not speaking of coloured gelatinous reels here; I do not mean to say that those things themselves are the medium. The medium is certainly something more than the actors, the scripts and the screens upon which the end results are seen.
Why should the case of the internet be any different? Presumably, the expression, ‘the Internet’ — which, by the way, no longer requires capitalization — refers to more than the electro-optical fibers that link together each network. I do not think that people are wont to say that they consider ‘the Internet’, in this locution, to refer to the means by which FTP files are transmitted or online games are played, even though those things might very well fall under some picky people’s conception of the internet. (Similarly, in the case of film, some picky person might want to put security tapes from a supermarket as a possible referent of ‘film’.) In everyday parlance, however, people use the expression primarily to refer to the photo and text content generated by network of HTML pages on the web. So it does not seem ridiculous that they would call it a medium, just like the photo and text content generated by printed shiny pages are rightly called a medium.
A final point is this. Linguistic would probably call the expression, ‘the Internet is a medium’, an idiom, in which case it is not supposed to be — and does not get by language users — understood literally. Instead might supposed to be synonymous with something like, ‘the HTML text and image based medium which gets realized by the infrastructure that transmits information between computers’.
It seems to be that no one is confused when they say that ‘the Internet is a medium’, just like no one is confused when they say that ‘film is a medium’. In the latter case, I am not speaking of coloured gelatinous reels here; I do not mean to say that those things themselves are the medium. The medium is certainly something more than the actors, the scripts and the screens upon which the end results are seen.
Why should the case of the internet be any different? Presumably, the expression, ‘the Internet’ — which, by the way, no longer requires capitalization — refers to more than the electro-optical fibers that link together each network. I do not think that people are wont to say that they consider ‘the Internet’, in this locution, to refer to the means by which FTP files are transmitted or online games are played, even though those things might very well fall under some picky people’s conception of the internet. (Similarly, in the case of film, some picky person might want to put security tapes from a supermarket as a possible referent of ‘film’.) In everyday parlance, however, people use the expression primarily to refer to the photo and text content generated by network of HTML pages on the web. So it does not seem ridiculous that they would call it a medium, just like the photo and text content generated by printed shiny pages are rightly called a medium.
A final point is this. Linguistic would probably call the expression, ‘the Internet is a medium’, an idiom, in which case it is not supposed to be — and does not get by language users — understood literally. Instead might supposed to be synonymous with something like, ‘the HTML text and image based medium which gets realized by the infrastructure that transmits information between computers’.
I know that the internet doesn’t need capitalization anymore. I just do it when I’m feeling grandiose or drunk (in the case of the above entry… I was feeling quite drunk).
Eh. But yeah, I’m considering FTP etc. etc. etc. to be part of “the internet”. And I’m considering the means by which yadda yadda. If you like, I can count weblogs, forums, chatrooms, blah blah blah as media. But the internet? Nope. The internet IS a medium in the same way as a blank piece of paper. But not in the same way as a magazine. You’re right.
Anyyyyyyyhooo…
Semantics semantics semantics.
I’m never concerned with everyday parlance. Because… people are idiots.
I know that the internet doesn’t need capitalization anymore. I just do it when I’m feeling grandiose or drunk (in the case of the above entry… I was feeling quite drunk).
Eh. But yeah, I’m considering FTP etc. etc. etc. to be part of “the internet”. And I’m considering the means by which yadda yadda. If you like, I can count weblogs, forums, chatrooms, blah blah blah as media. But the internet? Nope. The internet IS a medium in the same way as a blank piece of paper. But not in the same way as a magazine. You’re right.
Anyyyyyyyhooo…
Semantics semantics semantics.
I’m never concerned with everyday parlance. Because… people are idiots.
(You know, I still put two spaces after periods, too.)
(You know, I still put two spaces after periods, too.)
I reread this thread months later. Thanks for your reply.
(I like your site. I like your writing. I hope this thread did not blur these attitudes.)
I reread this thread months later. Thanks for your reply.
(I like your site. I like your writing. I hope this thread did not blur these attitudes.)
Hardly. You didn’t say anything that would give me the impression that you didn’t.
It makes me wonder, though… I never check back on threads I’ve replied to. Who knows how many responses are floating around out there unread.
But I should probably get around to replying to some of my e-mail before worry about things like that. There are a few messages that have been waiting six months for a reply.
Hardly. You didn’t say anything that would give me the impression that you didn’t.
It makes me wonder, though… I never check back on threads I’ve replied to. Who knows how many responses are floating around out there unread.
But I should probably get around to replying to some of my e-mail before worry about things like that. There are a few messages that have been waiting six months for a reply.