How New is New Media?
July 19, 2007 Posted by Roger Overton
“What has been is what will be, and what has been done is what will be done, and there is nothing new under the sun.” Ecclesiastes 1:9
We are far too accustomed to hearing about “new things.” When shopping we are constantly faced with “new and improved” products. Our politicians claim to advance “new” plans and ideas. Even some theologians argue that they’ve got a “new perspective” to offer us from time to time. And now many of us are claiming to be involved in something called “new media.” Are we really talking about something new, or is there nothing new under the sun?
From the context of Ecclesiastes, we can see that this famous verse refers to satisfaction in life. No amount of human creativity can bring about something so new that it will change where we derive our satisfaction or our salvation. These have always been found in God and they always will be found in Him. The writer of Ecclesiastes did not condemn human ingenuity altogether, but made it clear that all of our attempts to satisfy ourselves are futile.
Still, the claim that there is “nothing new under the sun” is generally true when more widely applied. The voyages to the moon brought man to a new destination, but traveling is something man has always done and will continue to do. Technology simply enhanced man’s ability to travel.
Similarly, new media is nothing more than communication. All that is new is the form of communication. Instead of writing to a local paper hoping to get an opinion published, many people have turned to publishing their thoughts on the Internet (primarily on blogs). Internet technology has enhanced textual communication by allowing just about everyone to publish their opinions. Among other things, this gives people a greater ability to exercise their freedom of speech.
If we were simply to leave it at that, though, we would be uncritical stewards of this new technology. It is far too easy to embrace the intended benefits of new technology without even noticing the unintended consequences. One such consequence is that readers become accustomed to brief, cursory thoughts and lose their appetite for longer, deeper commentaries. We might expect, then, that in the long-run people will generally have a lower tolerance for complex lines of argument and will only give ear to pithy sound bites. So while new media is merely a new way of doing something we’ve done before, it does bring to bear both new opportunities and new consequences.
Related posts:
Posted in 
content rss
July 19th, 2007 at 11:05 pm
I'll admit to being puzzled by the “new media” label. It sounds more like a marketing concept than anything else. I like the raw democracy of blogging and the way it allows anyone with an opinion to speak out, though being heard is always a challenge. One consequence is that it's hard to tell, with so many people expressing themselves, who really is worth listening to. The internet is a bit like the corner pub — lots of opinions, but not a lot of wisdom.
This blog, of course, is a notable exception to that last comment.
July 20th, 2007 at 1:01 am
I agree. I'm not sure where the label came from, but my guess is that it came from someone promoting the power or superiority of blogging and such over newspapers and television media. Web 2.0 might be more neutral, since it only entails that this is the next generation of Internet communication. However, Web 2.0 isn't as recognized/used as New Media.
Oh, and thanks for claiming we're an exception