Final Exam Post I

In my previous blog posts on Neil Postman’s book Technopoly I expressed my disagreement with the author’s analysis and opinion. And, I welcome the opportunity to expand on those thoughts in the final paper. Criticisms of technology's impact on culture are not uncommon. And, Postman’s “gloom and doom” predictions of the negative impact of technology are totally fear-based and incorrect. Postman states, "Technopoly is a state of culture. It is also a state of mind. It consists in the deification of technology, which means that the culture seeks its authorization in technology, finds its satisfactions in technology, and takes its orders from technology." Technopoly, he argues, flourishes wherever people "believe that information is an unmixed blessing, which through its continued and uncontrolled production and dissemination offers increased freedom, creativity, and peace of mind.... Technopoly flourishes when the defenses against information break down" (p. 71 ). In the final paper assignment, we are asked whether technology contributes to or detracts from the philosophy of University educational missions and to answer the question “Are modern-day college campuses technopolies?” . Postman’s book is written with thinly disguised despair regarding technology. So, the paper topic, the way it is framed, may call for a concession that college campuses are a Technopoly, but, unlike Postman’s view, that is not bad.

In any case, I will be disagreeing with Professor Postman’s opinion that we live in a "totalitarian technocracy" (p. 48). The pseudo-intellectualism that permeates Postman’s book is obvious. The guy basically says us common folk are too stupid to sift through the information that is available because of technology. I personally have a lot more faith in the “average Joe” than does Postman. The idea that technology will render individuals impotent is utterly ridiculous. People seek out information to help them in their daily lives. The fact that the internet, for example, has made information easily accessible is a good thing, not a negative consequence as Postman purports.

One of my last blog posts was about Sal Kahn who is providing a new model for stripped-down free learning. According to You Tube he has the most popular open-course video library on its site, with more views than MIT, Stanford or UC-Berkeley. Private Universities should be fear-mongering, because Kahn has created a site which could put them out of business. And, the number of views his site generates proves that people are pursuing their information wisely. The “defenses against information” (71) which Postman warns readers are the minds of the people. My paper will show that new technologies create new opportunities for empowerment not powerlessness.