Technology and Society by Neil Postman 5/7

soulstice99 Says:

Dec 27, 2007 - great lecture. it's deserving of more views.

scoliosispony Says:

Jan 22, 2008 - definitely, it's disappointing that only 1/4 of the people who viewed the first part viewed the last part as well, and telling

djm99001 Says:

Jan 24, 2008 - This lecture is a synopsis of his book "Technopoly."

tokotokotoko3 Says:

Mar 7, 2008 - Makes sense - its not a smart lecture. Especially if you see it from the perspective of the time passed.

typeclash Says:

Mar 17, 2009 - or at least it deserves some reflection

typeclash Says:

Mar 17, 2009 - How do you mean?

tokotokotoko3 Says:

Mar 17, 2009 - Well, because time proved him wrong on most everything. Or do you really wanna get rid of the internet, because "no one needs so many tv channels"?And if he would just take a quick look into history, he would notice that the majority of our useful inventions came from something no one would have predicted to be useful. Check out James Burke and his show "connections. He has much smarter things to say :D

typeclash Says:

Mar 17, 2009 - Tnx for the tip, I will check into James Burke. If I wan't to get rid of the internet, hmm, ask me again in 25 years :).

typeclash Says:

Mar 19, 2009 - From this clip i can't see where history has proven him wrong and I don't think he want's to get rid if the internet because no one needs 40 tv channels. He tells people to think about what problem a new invention is solving. And states the fact that new solution might cause new problems. A new technology give something to the people but some other thing is being taken away. Usually the thing given means more then what is lost.

typeclash Says:

Mar 19, 2009 - The thing about internet is that it gives us so much at many different aspects of life but it's hard to say what is being lost in the process.

tokotokotoko3 Says:

Mar 23, 2009 - My comment was a year old, so I cant remember the details and wont watch it all again. But for one: He mocks the funding of the internet (by Gore). He would have not supported it. IMO we would have lost the greatest invention of the last 100 years.He also demands that we assess beforehand what problem a research solves. But the internet and other history shows: its not possible to foresee future uses. Electricity comes in a way from the discovery that you can make dead frogs twitch their legs.

kskunk Says:

May 12, 2009 - maybe the most important thing he has encouraged is we need to ask questions.

MadsterV Says:

Dec 23, 2009 - Did he just say... "moderate the cultural changes"?wow. Did the irony escape everyone else?

929myohmy Says:

Jan 26, 2010 - He said, "I don't if much can be done to moderate the cultural changes that media entrepreneurs will enforce, but citizens ought to know what is happening, and keep an attentive eye on such people."

MadsterV Says:

Jan 26, 2010 - oh okay then, I thought it was weird and I got lost in the sentence

wompeter1 Says:

Mar 11, 2010 - No, no, no. Electricity was used to discover that there are electrochemical processes going on in muscle tissue. They applied an ELECTRICAL circuit to the frog's legs. Jeez, the stupidity.

wda013 Says:

May 29, 2010 - (take-away:)(4:30) What is the problem this thechnology will solve?Whose problem is it?What new problems will be created...?What people and institutions will be most seriously harmed?What changes in language are occurring as a result...?What new sources of conomic and political power will emerge?

TiberiusBrast Says:

Sep 7, 2010 - "what new sources of economic and political power will emerge?" This is an important question. To understand who the new digital technology is fundamentally transforming our society please search "Multitude Project"

TiberiusBrast Says:

Sep 30, 2010 - @datascatter absolutly non sense ! I support Direct Democracy, yes, but it has nothing to do with what you just posted... :) I am not a spammer, as you can see I am interested in this discussion. I wrote a lot about the new technology and how it affects the power structure in society. You cannot write an entire argument here, so I link to more info...

TaylorWmh Says:

Nov 28, 2010 - Be a part of Russian ladies community gettop5.info

pietrosammarco Says:

Dec 5, 2010 - Yes! And I think when he appears/sounds like he is making statements that are technophobic, they are actually just consciously assertive statements "against" technology to make us reflect. He is only being so assertive to counter our society's assertive tendency of not reflecting on technology

pietrosammarco Says:

Dec 5, 2010 - And also, this youtube video of "Neil Postman speaking" in 1998 (02/07/1998 top right of the video) should be understood/reflected upon in context of that year, and the technological ecosystem of that time. Imagine what the internet was like back then. I think Postman would want us to NOT take the denotative value of what he was saying in this presentation as a bible of "literal truth", but as words conveying a message.

vintagedesert Says:

Jan 11, 2011 - This entire speech ought to be required viewing. 

JustATheist Says:

Mar 29, 2011 - Summary in the first 1:45.... Opinion. Opinion. Reading does what? .. Charged-language about Politics. Opinion. Critical about Charged Language. Anyway He Wins you over.You summarized the creation of the 20th century far to quickly. You summarized the media to quickly. Your questions do not enlighten any positives. Microphones. Helps your problems and Hurts my ears. From there on out its Technophobic answers.