Television: Technology and Cultural Form by Raymond Williams


Williams starts by reflecting on the sentiment, generalized throughout society, that television has altered our world. He critiques technological determinism, which argues that technology influences culture and society rather than vice versa. He also critiques the idea he calls symptomatic technology, where technology comes to be as a reflection of the values of the society.

His problem with all these critiques is that they all assume the R&D to be neutral. There are no intentions behind the development of tech in these arguments.

He argues that powerful decision-makers in society can have more resources invested in technical solutions to their needs, but the social history of communications technology is different. The newspaper was a response to the dramatic shifts the social system and various crises within it. Early newspapers consisted of power centers conveying messages to their agents, plus news on the expanding system of trade. But as the industrial revolution progressed and the world began urbanizing, the church and school could no longer adequately explain the world. There was much background and news that had to be conveyed, and the newspaper filled that role. Similarly, photography was a way of maintaining ties in an era of migrations to cities and other places of work.

When broadcasting came in, newer technologies were already fulfilling the new society’s needs. Newspapers conveyed political and economic information, telegraphy allowed long-distance business communication, and the movie theater fulfilled curiosity and entertainment needs. Because all these technologies had different uses, and broadcasting was a conglomerate of them, it’s difficult to pin it down with a simple explanation. Only in hindsight, with the void in simple explanation, will people argue that TV and broadcasting were developed to be a form of social integration and control.

The social context that broadcasting emerged from was that of mobile privatization. Two seemingly contradictory tendencies happened in the early twentieth century. On the one hand, the world was becoming larger. The industrial revolution created a society requiring mobility, which also fostered a sense of curiosity about the world. Self-sufficient homes were not self-sufficient anymore, and required funding and supplies from outside sources. Outside conditions constantly threatened the private family, which was needed for social reproduction. So, mobile privatization served both needs.

I don’t buy his rejection of “symptomatic technology” and see his work has revitalizing “technology is neutral” arguments, even if Williams wouldn’t say just that.
( )

required reading. Not in general, for me being that I am a cultural studies major and Williams is a major figure of the discipline. This is incredibly dated for the technology Williams so accurately predicated is already obsolete, video cassettes, satellite tv, pay-per-view, we must wait for a comprehensive analysis of the internet now, if it hasn't already been done. I could go on but I'll leave that to the institution of education. ( )