1. BETA
version
Social
media
and
socio-­‐analysis
David
Patman
Abstract
This
paper
discusses
the
proliferation
of
online
social
media
(Facebook,
YouTube,
Wikipedia,
etc),
its
implications
for
group
relations,
and
for
the
psychoanalytic
study
of
group
and
organisational
life.
Internet
social
theorist
Clay
Shirky
argues
that
the
emergence
of
online
social
media
has
drastically
reduced
the
barriers
to
participation
in
group
endeavours,
enabling
the
achievement
of
sophisticated,
collective
action
outside
of
formal
organisations
and
institutions.
From
a
socio-­‐analytic
perspective,
however,
organisations
also
fulfil
a
second
function:
that
of
containing
the
anxiety
of
members.
Drawing
on
socio-­‐analytic
theory
and
case
examples,
the
paper
will
argue
that
the
threat
posed
to
the
existence
of
organisational
and
institutional
structures
is
also
a
challenge
to
the
effectiveness
of
their
embedded
social
defences
against
anxiety.
As
a
result,
there
is
likely
to
be
conscious
and/or
unconscious
resistance
to
the
introduction
of
social
media
and
other
'Web
2.0'
tools
within
organisations
and
other
social
systems
which
are
based
on
traditional
hierarchical
models.
The
paper
also
explores
the
work
of
media
theorist
Marshall
McLuhan
about
connections
between
communications
technology
and
society.
McLuhan
suggests
that
cultures
in
which
authority,
institutions,
knowledge
and
experience
have
become
fragmented
and
distributed
through
the
dominance
of
the
printed
word,
tend
to
become
re-­‐integrated
as
instantaneous
electronic
communication
proliferates.
For
example,
private
experience
becomes
re-­‐publicized,
while
the
hierarchical
social
systems
which
support
the
concept
of
both
social
and
emotional
privacy
are
‘re-­‐
tribalized’
in
an
emerging
‘global
village’.
The
paper
concludes
that
socio-­‐analytic
principles
offer
a
highly
relevant
conceptual
framework
for
the
investigation
of
new
kinds
of
groups
and
communities
which
are
emerging
at
ever
more
rapid
pace
in
an
increasingly
connected
world.
However,
it
also
cautions
that
the
discipline
of
socio-­‐analysis,
which
has
its
origins
in
the
study
of
traditional
organisational
forms,
will
itself
need
'regeneration'
through
continued
engagement
with
and
learning
from
the
experience
of
online
social
media.
1.
Suitable
for
work?
This
paper
discusses
the
proliferation
of
online
social
media
applications,
its
implications
for
organisations,
and
for
the
psychoanalytic
study
of
organisational
life.
By
‘social
media’
I
mean
applications
which
allow
people
to
share
information
and
interact
with
each
other
via
electronic
networks
such
as
the
internet.
Popular
social
media
applications
run
by
corporations
include
Facebook,
Twitter,
YouTube,
Flickr
and
Myspace,
but
there
are
also
individually
created
blogs
and
discussion
forums,
plus
email
and
instant
messaging
in
this,
where
these
enable
group
communication.
I
would
also
include
collaborative
knowledge
creating
applications
such
as
Wikipedia,
virtual
worlds
such
as
Second
Life,
multi-­‐player
online
games
such
as
World
of
Warcraft,
and
private
software
used
by
organisations,
such
as
Yammer.
Social
media
applications
like
these
have
of
course
become
very
popular
in
recent
years,
with
more
than
550
million
people
on
Facebook,
65
million
tweets
posted
on
Twitter
each
day,
and
2
billion
video
views
each
day
on
YouTube1.
Social
media
advocates
have
been
quick
to
promote
the
benefits
of
social
media
to
organisations,
both
as
a
method
for
marketing
and
as
a
means
to
improve
productivity.
Social
media
marketing
has
quickly
taken
off,
with
firms
developing
their
own
Facebook
and
Twitter
accounts,
YouTube
campaigns,
and
'crowd-­‐sourcing'
programs.
In
marketing,
social
media
is
typically
regarded
as
a
tool
for
reaching
particular
audiences,
gathering
demographic
information,
and
engaging
targeted
consumers
in
‘conversations’
which
will
hopefully
promote
brand
awareness
and
consumer
loyalty.
That
is,
social
media
is
regarded
and
used
in
the
same
way
as
the
same
as
any
other
medium
–
as
a
means
to
get
information
about
a
product
from
the
producer
to
consumers
who
are
most
likely
to
buy.
However,
despite
its
growing
popularity,
there
has
been
no
clear
demonstration
of
the
success
of
social
media
over
1
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/10_ways_social_media_will_change_in_2011.php
1

2. BETA
version
other
forms
of
marketing,
and
indeed
some
commentators
see
social
media
campaigns
as
somewhat
tokenistic,
or
even
potentially
damaging
to
a
brand.
There
is
some
evidence
that
firms
who
employ
social
media
marketing
by,
for
example,
placing
banner
ads
on
Facebook
pages,
or
creating
Twitter
accounts
to
follow
consumers,
are
perceived
to
be
unwelcome
intrusions
into
private
social
space
in
a
similar
way
to
telemarketing
calls
or
electronic
spam.
There
is
also
an
anxiety
that
personal
details
shared
with
large
social
media
hosts
such
as
Facebook
and
Google
will
be
sold
for
marketing
purposes.
While
the
jury
is
still
out
on
the
value
of
social
media
as
a
marketing
tool,
social
media
has
struggled
as
a
technique
for
increasing
productivity.
Primarily,
social
media
is
perceived
as
useful
for
enabling
communication
and
collaboration
between
teams
within
an
organisation,
but
also
with
organisational
stakeholders
who
may
be
outside
the
boundaries
of
the
organisation,
such
as
clients.
Yet
implementation
of
social
media
as
a
productivity
tool
has
also
been
problematic,
with
adoption
either
remaining
low
or
being
taken
up
in
ways
which
are
perceived
as
contrary
to
the
wellbeing
of
the
organization.
For
example,
a
Gartner
report
released
earlier
this
year
noted
that
'social
media
disrupts
the
long-­‐standing
rules
of
business
in
many
ways'
and
proposes
'seven
critical
questions'
that
businesses
should
consider
before
developing
a
social
media
strategy.
Reducing
complex
problems
to
'seven
critical
questions'
is
perhaps
typical
of
the
mainstream
management
consultant
approach,
but
the
accompanying
press
release
is
interesting:
Social
media
offers
tempting
opportunities
to
interact
with
employees,
business
partners,
customers,
prospects
and
a
whole
host
of
anonymous
participants
on
the
social
Web,"
said
Carol
Rozwell,
vice
president
and
distinguished
analyst
at
Gartner.
"However,
those
who
participate
in
social
media
need
guidance
from
their
employer
about
the
rules,
responsibilities,
'norms'
and
behaviours
expected
of
them,
and
these
topics
are
commonly
covered
in
the
social
media
policy2.
This
dilemma,
of
wanting
to
reap
the
benefits
of
social
media,
but
simultaneously
seeking
to
minimise
any
collateral
damage
resulting
from
‘inappropriate’
use
by
employees,
is
particularly
acute
in
government.
Social
media,
and
‘e-­‐Government’
services
more
generally,
offers
the
possibility
of
providing
greater
access
to
government
services
and
involving
citizens
more
closely
in
the
formulation
of
policy.
The
Obama
administration
enthusiastically
embraced
the
possibility
for
greater
citizen
involvement
in
public
policy
development
through
the
establishment
of
online
forums
for
consultation
about
health
care
and
other
social
issues.
The
Australian
government,
more
cautiously,
has
signalled
its
intention
to
embrace
the
democratizing
potential
of
Web
2.0
technologies
through
the
development
of
a
policy
'Gov
2.0'.
My
organisation,
a
federal
government
communications
regulator,
is
seeking
to
be
a
leader
in
the
use
of
social
media
tools
to
promote
public
consultation
in
Australia,
emulating
the
FCC's
'Reboot'
initiative
in
the
US.
Nevertheless
it
is
fair
to
say
that
the
success
of
such
initiatives
has
so
far
been,
at
best,
qualified,
with
limited
interaction
from
citizens.
An
early
attempt
at
online
consultation
by
the
Australian
Department
of
Broadband,
Communications
and
the
Digital
Economy
concerning
the
future
directions
of
digital
media
used
an
online
discussion
forum.
However,
this
first
opening
up
to
citizens
was
swamped
by
angry
responses
to
the
government's
proposed
internet
filtering
laws,
but
very
little
else
of
relevance
or
value
to
the
topic.
A
paper
by
Cliff
Lampe
et
al
discusses
what
the
authors
describe
as
'inherent
barriers
to
the
use
of
social
media
for
public
policy
informatics',
based
on
a
case
study
of
a
Michigan
government
service
provider's
use
of
social
media
for
consultation
with
its
constituents.
The
provider's
management
was
hoping
to
use
an
online
discussion
forum
as
a
replacement
for
the
surveys
used
in
previous
years
to
conduct
a
'needs
assessment'
of
constituents
who
may
be
eligible
for
educational
assistance.
A
sophisticated
communication
strategy
and
online
application
was
developed
but
the
provider
found
that
interaction
was
very
low
-­‐
so
low
that
it
did
not
meet
the
requirements
of
the
central
agency
funding
the
provider.
As
a
result,
the
provider
opted
to
return
to
the
written
survey
method.
2
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1544814
2

3. BETA
version
The
study
offered
a
number
of
explanations
for
the
failure
of
the
project,
including
that:
• Audiences
were
not
the
right
match
for
social
media.
• The
organization
had
a
hard
time,
outside
of
a
small
group
of
champions,
in
thinking
about
new
audiences.
• The
organization,
outside
of
the
project
champions,
had
low
motivation
to
participate.
• The
software
was
too
hard
to
use
for
users
not
familiar
with
social
media.
• The
timeframe
mattered.
• The
task
may
not
have
been
a
good
fit
for
social
media.
The
last
point
is
perhaps
the
key.
As
Lampe
et
al
argue,
The
tools
of
social
media
depend
on
interactivity
and
user
contribution.
While
crowd-­‐sourcing
feedback
on
community
development
priorities
could
work
in
that
framework,
it
could
be
that
the
specific
goals
of
generating
data
for
a
needs
assessment
were
too
specific
for
a
social
media
project.
Goals
like
increasing
interaction,
fostering
new
connections,
and
encouraging
stakeholder
contribution
are
all
goals
aligned
with
the
features
of
social
media.
However,
the
nature
of
social
media
is
grassroots
interaction
between
users,
with
the
organization
only
acting
as
another
type
of
user
in
these
cases.
Simply
broadcasting
messages
[as
the
case
study
application
did],
not
responding
to
contributions
of
stakeholders,
over-­‐
prescribing
topics
and
overly
specific
goals
may
all
hinder
the
success
of
social
media
projects
in
the
public
sector.
So,
despite
its
massive
popularity
and
increasing
permeation
of
our
lives,
there
appears
to
be
something
about
social
media
which
does
not
fit
easily
within
an
organizational
context,
as
least
in
the
sense
of
traditional
organizations.
What
is
it
about
social
media
–
and
indeed
about
organizations
–
that
generates
this
incompatibility?
Organizing
without
organizations
In
Clay
Shirky’s
book
Here
Comes
Everybody:
The
Power
of
Organizing
Without
Organizations,
he
argues
that
the
emergence
of
social
media
has
drastically
reduced
the
barriers
to
participation
in
group
endeavours,
enabling
the
achievement
of
sophisticated,
collective
action
without
the
need
for
formal
organisations
and
institutions.
Shirky's
book
charts
the
rapid
growth
of
the
use
of
social
media,
its
social
impact,
and
explores
reasons
for
its
popularity.
Although
Shirky
does
not
explicitly
reference
any
psychological
theory
of
motivation,
like
Bion
(whom
he
references)
he
regards
humans
as
'group
animals',
with
an
innate
inclination
toward
group
interaction
and
work,
limited
only
by
physical/technical
restraints
on
communication
and
association
between
individuals.
Drawing
on
economist
Ronald
Coase's
concept
of
'transaction
costs'
described
in
his
1936
article
'The
Nature
of
the
Firm',
Shirky
argues
that
hierarchical
organisations
emerged
as
the
most
efficient
method
for
the
coordination
of
large-­‐scale
collective
action,
given
the
costs
of
communication
and
coordination
between
large
numbers
of
people.
The
rise
of
the
internet
and
social
media
applications,
he
asserts,
has
reduced
such
costs
to
the
point
at
which,
in
some
cases,
organisations
and
institutions
are
no
longer
the
most
efficient
means
for
achieving
collective
work.
Instead,
social
media
applications
allow
near-­‐instant
low-­‐cost
communication
and
information-­‐sharing
which
facilitate
large-­‐scale
group
action
without
the
need
for
formal
organizational
structure.
Shirky
cites
a
number
of
examples
in
which
social
media
have
played
a
central
role
in
organising
collective
action:
retrieving
a
stolen
mobile
phone,
co-­‐ordinating
'flash
mob'
protests,
providing
forum
for
special
interest
groups
to
connect
with
each
other,
development
of
information
resources
through
Wikipedia,
among
others.
There
are
many
other
recent
examples:
building
political
awareness
and
coordinating
protest
action
in
Egypt
and
Libya,
3

4. BETA
version
keeping
in
touch
with
rescuers
in
the
New
Zealand
and
Japanese
earthquakes,
exposing
political
hypocrisy
and
corruption
via
WikiLeaks.
This
group
action
would
not
have
been
possible
prior
to
the
development
and
proliferation
of
social
media.
In
terms
of
traditional
organizations,
as
Shirky
points
out,
the
potential
value
of
social
media
is
its
ability
to
bridge
communication
barriers
between
geographically,
culturally
and
hierarchically
distant
people.
However,
the
very
thing
that
provides
the
creative
potential
of
social
media,
its
'openness',
is
also
what
is
perceived
by
management
as
most
risky
for
organisations.
The
risk
of
employees
communicating
directly
with
a
CEO,
or
key
stakeholders,
or
the
public,
is
felt
to
be
potentially
disastrous,
and
as
the
Gartner
recommendations
suggest,
the
defensive
response
is
to
establish
'rules'
for
how
social
media
may
be
used.
A
response
that,
in
effect,
drastically
limits
the
scope
of
communication
offered
by
social
media
to
that
which
is
controlled
by
the
company.
Taking
Shirky’s
view
to
the
extreme,
any
task
that
was
previously
fulfilled
by
an
organization
should,
in
theory,
be
able
to
be
more
efficiently
achieved
by
social
media
-­‐
although
is
difficult
to
see
how
certain
tasks
which
require
collective
action,
for
example,
smelting
copper
or
performing
heart
surgery,
could
be
completed
using
social
media
alone.
Shirky’s
answer
might
be
that
the
right
social
media
application
has
not
yet
been
invented.
Shirky
is
not
an
advocate
for
un-­‐organization,
however,
he
simply
regards
traditional
organizational
structures
as
sub-­‐optimal
in
societies
which
include
coordination
of
tasks
through
social
media
as
an
alternative.
However,
while
organizational
forms
have
certainly
evolved,
with
less
hierarchical
structures,
more
discrete
work
packages
managed
as
projects,
arguably
greater
labour
force
flexibility,
it
currently
appears
that
the
traditional
bureaucratic
form
will
be
with
us
a
while
longer.
If
anything,
it
is
in
the
broader
industries
and
institutions
where
change
appears
to
be
most
visible.
For
example,
communications
industries
such
the
print
media,
book
publishing,
TV
and
radio
broadcasting,
cinema,
music
production
and
distribution
business
–
which
are
in
direct
competition
with
social
media
are
seriously
threatened.
But
the
role
and
activities
of
public
institutions
responsible
for
education,
health,
defence,
the
law,
government
and
social
welfare
also
seem
to
be
in
crisis,
or
at
least
in
flux.
In
fact,
social
media
appears
to
have
generated
a
new
set
of
social
problems
for
society
in
general,
as
well
as
organizations.
The
agency
for
which
I
work
-­‐
the
Australian
Communications
and
Media
Authority
-­‐
has
responsibility
for
dealing
with
some
of
these
perceived
risks,
including
what
is
known
as
‘cybersafety’:
the
protection
of
children
from
offensive
or
disturbing
content
on
the
internet,
from
online
stalkers
who
may
be
attempting
to
contact
them
via
social
media,
and
from
online
bullying
from
classmates
through
social
media.
The
issue
of
‘sexting’
–
in
which
children
or
young
people
voluntarily
or
unwittingly
expose
themselves
in
sexualised
images
or
text
sent
via
SMS
to
an
unknown
and
potentially
large
audience
–
also
falls
into
this
category.
Earlier
this
year,
a
young
woman
cadet
at
the
Australian
Defence
Force
Academy
reported
that
video
images
of
her
having
consensual
sex
with
another
cadet
had
been
transmitted
via
Skype
to
a
number
of
male
cadets
without
her
knowledge.
Despite
years
of
bastardisation
and
abuse
of
young
men
and
women
in
the
Defence
forces,
for
some
reason
it
has
been
this
event
which
has
alarmed
the
government
into
taking
the
unprecedented
step
of
publicly
rebuking
Army
chiefs
and
initiating
a
series
of
public
inquiries.
It
seems
that
the
issue
of
what
is,
and
should
be,
public
and
what
is,
and
should
be,
private
lies
at
the
heart
of
questions
and
anxieties
about
social
media.
Social
media
has
the
potential
to
publicise
what
is
normally
held
private,
something
that
is
experienced
as
dangerous,
not
least
by
organizations.
The
psycho-­‐analytic
study
of
organizations
offers
a
useful
way
to
understand
why
traditional
organizational
forms
persist,
even
as
broader
social
changes
appear,
as
Shirky
argues,
to
make
them
increasingly
irrelevant.
3.
Social
media
and
socio-­‐analysis
The
psycho-­‐analytic
study
of
organizations,
which
I
refer
to
as
‘socio-­‐analysis’,
reveals
that
organizations
(and
institutions)
fulfil
not
one
but
three
tasks:
firstly,
the
task
which
can
be
consciously
agreed
by
members
and
stakeholders,
and
which
may
be
characterised
as
the
purpose
or
mission
–
what
Gordon
Lawrence
has
referred
to
as
the
‘normative
primary
task’.
There
may
be
some
differences
between
members
about
what
this
task
is,
or
4

5. BETA
version
should
be
–
the
‘existential
primary
task’
in
Lawrence’s
terms
-­‐
and
this
can
lead
to
difficulties
within
the
organization,
particularly
if
it
is
different
to
the
normative
primary
task.
Nevertheless,
both
kinds
of
task
are
available
for
conscious
awareness
and
reflection.
It
is
the
third
task
-­‐
the
‘phenomenal
primary
task’
-­‐
that
can
explain
the
persistence
of
what
would
appear
to
be
irrelevant
organizational
forms.
Lawrence
characterises
this
task
as
being
outside
of
the
conscious
awareness
of
the
members
of
an
organization
and
only
visible
only
through
what
can
be
inferred
from
their
behaviour.
The
phenomenal
primary
task
is
concerned
with
containing
the
anxiety
associated
with
the
first
two,
and
can
manifest
though
organizational
culture,
informal
work
practices,
shared
values
and
assumptions,
leadership
styles
as
well
as
in
the
formal
procedures,
processes,
technologies
and
structures
of
the
organization3.
In
this
sense,
the
organization
can
be
regarded
as
a
‘socio-­‐technical
system’
and
changes
to
these
organisational
‘technologies’
can
therefore
impact
on
the
organization’s
capacity
to
achieve
its
phenomenal
primary
task.
That
is,
the
kind
of
changes
to
an
organization’s
means
of
communication
and
organizational
processes
which
are
entailed
by
the
introduction
of
social
media,
are
likely
to
disturb
its
ability
to
contain
anxiety
and
are
therefore
likely
to
be
resisted
at
all
levels.
Phenomena
such
as
these
have
been
well
documented
in
the
socio-­‐analytic
literature
about
organizational
change
and
its
effects
on
social
defences,
from
both
a
psychodynamic
(Jaques
and
Menzies)
and
socio-­‐technical
perspective
(Trist
and
Bamforth).
Interventions
have
taken
place
mainly
at
the
organizational
and
group
level,
and
have
focused
on
working
with
the
unconscious
dynamics
at
work
within
the
particular
organizational
system.
Such
interventions
have
not
necessarily
engaged
with
changes
in
the
broader
social
context,
and
the
relationship
of
the
organization
to
the
society
in
which
it
exists.
An
exception
is
the
work
of
Miller
and
Rice
on
‘open
systems’
theory,
which
is
concerned
with
management
of
the
relationship
between
an
organization
and
its
environment
in
the
service
of
the
organization’s
primary
task.
It
is
the
function
of
management
to
monitor
changes
in
the
environment
and
to
adjust
boundary
processes
in
order
to
accommodate
them
so
as
to
ensure
the
continuing
relevance
and
survival
of
the
organization.
The
proliferation
of
social
media
arguably
represents
a
major
change
in
the
external
environment
of
most
organizations,
and
indeed
in
the
internal
environment
as
organizations
seek
to
implement
social
media
tools
to
increase
productivity.
How
then
has
socio-­‐analysis
engaged
with
the
emergence
of
social
media
and
its
impact
on
organizations,
and
society
in
general?
Theoretical
engagement
has
taken
two
forms,
broadly
speaking:
1. Engagement
from
a
classical
psychoanalytic
perspective,
e.g.
regarding
the
experience
of
social
media
as
located
purely
in
the
individual
2. Engagement
from
a
group
relations
perspective,
e.g.
regarding
the
experience
of
social
media
as
located
in
the
group,
particularly
the
'large
group'
3.1
The
internet
regression
The
classically
'psychoanalytic'
view
of
the
experience
of
social
media
is
encapsulated
by
Norman
Holland
in
his
article
‘The
Internet
Regression’,
first
published
via
Robert
Young’s
online
Free
Associations
forum
in
19954.
Holland
analysed
the
behaviour
of
users
of
the
newly
popular
online
bulletin
boards
and
theorised
that
the
internet
offers
a
place
in
which
primitive
drives
of
aggression,
sex
and
can
be
expressed
in
relative
safety,
without
the
‘real
world’
consequences.
He
cites
as
examples
the
prevalence
of
aggressive
‘flaming’
and
the
tendency
for
sexual
innuendo
and
flirting
which
seems
to
occur
on
blogs
with
greater
frequency
than
in
real
life.
He
also
suggests
that
the
‘openness’
and
generosity
which
has
characterised
some
online
endeavours
(such
as
the
creation
of
‘open’
software
and
freeware)
represents
a
form
of
regression
to
an
idealized
state.
Holland
welcomes
this
regressive
property
of
the
internet
for
its
potential
to
encourage
creative
play
and
experimentation
with
identity,
echoing
Sherry
Turkle’s
arguments
in
her
book
The
Second
Self,
about
the
relationship
between
humans
and
computers.
3
Jaques
and
Menzies
have
described
these
collectively
as
‘social
defence
systems’
4
http://www.human-­‐nature.com/free-­‐associations/holland.html
5

6. BETA
version
However,
like
Turkle,
Holland
also
sees
a
negative
side
to
this
relationship
manifesting
in
addiction
and
dependence,
as
the
boundary
between
person
and
machine
becomes
blurred:
‘In
short,
when
communicating
on
the
Internet,
we
set
up
a
relationship
with
other
people
in
which
the
people
get
less
human
and
the
machine
gets
more
human.’
This
occurs
partly
because
the
internet
(at
that
time)
enabled
only
simple
text-­‐based
communications
whose
very
lack
of
verbal
or
visual
cues,
according
to
Holland,
provided
perfect
sites
for
transference.
Holland’s
final
paragraph
is
notable
for
its
accurate,
if
somewhat
cynical,
prediction
about
the
future
internet:
Those
who
don't
see
it
that
way,
however,
can
take
comfort.
The
Internet
regression
is
also
temporary.
Today's
Internetting
will
change,
maybe
even
by
the
time
you
read
this.
A
huge
influx
of
unskilled
users
is
coming
onto
the
Internet,
people
who
lack
the
cheery
openness
that
a
hacker
like
Alex
expresses.
The
technology
too
will
change.
Real
Soon
Now
(as
the
computer
magazines
say),
we
will
be
able
to
replace
today's
"plain
text"
with
digitized
voices.
Real
Soon
Now,
we
will
be
able
to
have
pictures
of
speaker
and
hearer.
Real
Soon
Now,
computer
technology
will
restore
to
the
Internet
the
physical
cues
of
face
to
face
talk.
Too
bad,
say
I.
The
Internet
Regression
has
been-­‐still
is-­‐fun.
However
Holland’s
use
of
individual
drive
theory
can
only
encompass
the
nature
of
the
relationship
between
person
and
machine,
whether
this
is
pathological
or
not.
While
this
made
sense
for
Turkle’s
pre-­‐internet
theory
of
human-­‐computer
relationships,
Holland
ends
up
neglecting
the
very
thing
that
is
most
distinctive
about
the
internet:
its
‘socio-­‐ability’,
its
capacity
to
provide
connections.
Turkle
has
been
a
central
thinker
in
the
psychoanalytically
informed
view
of
the
internet.
Her
second
book
Life
On
the
Screen:
Identity
in
the
Age
of
the
Internet,
published
in
1995,
suggests
that
participation
in
‘virtual
worlds’
such
as
multi-­‐user
online
games
and
Second
Life
can
be
psychologically
therapeutic
through
their
encouragement
of
play
and
experimentation
with
alternative
virtual
identities.
Turkle
also
explores
the
effects
of
‘social
robots’:
machines
or
programs
which
are
capable
of
interacting
with
humans
in
life-­‐like
ways.
This
discussion
is
further
developed
in
Turkle’s
third
book,
2010’s
Alone
Together:
Why
we
expect
more
from
technology
and
less
from
each
other,
in
which
she
argues
that
social
machines,
such
as
electronic
pets
and
robots
which
care
for
the
elderly,
are
increasingly
becoming
substitutes
for
authentic
social
experience
with
‘real’
people.
Use
of
social
media
applications
is
also
characterised
in
this
way,
with
SMS
texting,
Twitter
and
Facebook
regarded
as
tools
which
promise
intimacy,
but
in
reality
serve
to
keep
people
separated.
She
repeatedly
emphasises
the
‘tethered’
nature
of
people’s
relationship
with
the
internet,
which
is
‘always
on’,
implying
an
insidious
dependence
on
electronic
communication
such
as
SMS
texting
and
Facebook,
particularly
by
young
people.
Like
Holland,
however,
Turkle
places
the
individual,
and
the
degree
to
which
they
are
able
to
achieve
psychologically
healthy
states
(such
as
authenticity
and
‘real’
intimacy),
at
the
centre
of
her
analysis.
She
does
not
conceptualise
the
internet
as
a
social
phenomenon,
but
instead
concentrates
on
what
appears
to
be
an
increasingly
pathological
relationship
between
individual
people
and
their
internet-­‐enabled
devices,
whether
this
be
smartphone,
or
computer
–
a
theme
which
may
be
traced
back
to
her
first
book,
1984’s
The
Second
Self.
3.2
The
internet
as
(very)
large
group
An
alternative
psychoanalytic
perspective
on
the
internet
which
has
emerged
more
recently
is
group-­‐oriented.
In
contrast
to
Holland,
Haim
Weinberg
has
argued
that
the
experience
of
the
internet
is
akin
to
that
of
the
large
group.
Like
Holland,
Weinberg
has
also
based
his
theory
on
a
study
of
the
behaviour
of
members
of
a
discussion
forum.
This
is
strange
given
that,
unlike
Holland,
Weinberg
is
writing
in
an
environment
in
which
the
internet
has
become
accessible
to
a
wider
public
and
allows
much
more
media-­‐rich
interactions
through
applications
such
as
Facebook
and
Twitter.
Nevertheless,
it
is
interesting
to
note
that
Weinberg
arrives
at
very
different
interpretations
of
internet
phenomena
than
Holland
or
Turkle.
Weinberg’s
view
is
that
the
vast
number
of
users
and
connections
which
comprise
the
internet
generate
a
sense
of
incomprehensible
vastness
that
generates
anxiety
in
any
online
‘group’.
This
is
dealt
with
in
various
ways
which
will
be
familiar
to
members
of
a
large
study
group.
Weinberg
also
observes
that,
unlike
in
a
large
study
group,
6

7. BETA
version
there
is
a
tendency
to
idealise
the
leader
–
where
the
leader
is
conceptualised
as
the
group
moderator
or
provider
of
technical
support.
Yet
is
it
valid
to
conceptualise
an
online
discussion
forum
as
a
‘large’
group
in
the
sense
envisaged
by
Turquet?
No
one
is
connected
to
the
whole
internet,
and
indeed
Shirky
argues
that
the
internet
actually
consists
of
many
‘small
groups’,
which
are
linked
by
individual
users
who
may
be
members
of
many
groups.
But
are
these
small
groups
really
groups
in
the
sense
intended
by,
for
example,
Bion?
Entities
such
as
Facebook
and
MySpace
are
known
as
'social
networks'
within
which
'friends'
(in
social
network
parlance)
link
to
each
other.
Groups
of
like-­‐minded
users
-­‐
not
necessarily
friends
-­‐
can,
and
frequently
do,
self-­‐
organise
within
such
networks.
Contributors
to
Wikipedia
and
other
collaborative
forums
are
often
referred
to
as
members
of
communities.
Users
of
Twitter
choose
to
'follow'
other
users,
while
users
accrue
'connections'
on
the
professional
networking
site
LinkedIn.
Platforms
such
as
YouTube,
Flickr
and
blogging
sites
enable
users
to
creatively
share
ideas
and
resources
in
the
form
of
text,
image,
audio
and
video
files.
The
terminology
and,
to
some
extent,
the
concepts
-­‐
groups,
communities,
friends,
followers,
sharing,
networks,
connections,
collaboration
-­‐
are
familiar
to
socio-­‐analysts.
Yet,
do
they
really
mean
the
same
thing?
For
example,
members
of
a
Facebook
group
may
never
have
met
in
person,
and
the
group
size
can
be
variable
and
extremely
large.
A
rapidly
emerging
trend
is
the
participation
in
social
media
groups
via
mobile
technologies,
such
as
smart
phones
and
broadband-­‐enabled
laptops.
So
a
user
might
be
in
a
different
geographic
location
each
time
they
participate
in
a
group.
Or
indeed,
might
be
literally
on
the
move
as
they
do
so.
Similarly,
the
question
of
time
for
interaction
between
users
of
online
social
networks
is
quite
different
to
in-­‐
person
interaction.
Certainly
it
is
possible
to
have
a
'real-­‐time'
online
conversation
with
people
using
chat-­‐room
functionality,
but
the
bulk
of
interaction
about
particular
topics
takes
place
over
days,
weeks
and
even
longer,
often
across
different
international
time
zones.
The
duration
of
groups
themselves
is
also
rather
fluid
-­‐
it
is
hard
to
know
when
they
have
started
and
when
they
have
finished.
For
example,
does
the
group
start
once
it
has
been
announced
by
its
creators,
or
once
members
link
to
it,
or
when
the
first
comment
is
made?
Does
the
group
finish
when
has
the
last
comment
has
been
made?
If
so,
how
do
members
know
when
the
last
comment
has
been
made?
In
the
case
where
group
members
retain
their
links
to
the
group
even
if
there
has
been
no
recent
activity
does
the
group
still
'exist'?
If
group
time
is
an
elusive
concept,
it
is
not
always
clear
what
the
'task'
of
a
particular
social
entity
is
–
or,
in
Bion’s
phrase,
what
work
it
is
'meeting'
to
do.
The
work
of
the
Wikipedia
community,
for
instance,
is
fairly
clear
-­‐
to
build
an
online
repository
of
knowledge
-­‐
but
what
is
the
task
of
Twitter?
Nevertheless,
as
Shirky
demonstrates,
social
networks
do
work
which
has
an
impact
in
the
physical
world:
they
are
not
just
virtual
basic
assumption
groups,
to
paraphrase
Bion.
For
example,
in
Melbourne,
the
'Save
The
Tote'
group
did
indeed
help
to
save
The
Tote
and
did
achieve
changes
to
the
licensing
laws
through
the
coordination
of
protests
and
provision
of
a
site
for
communication
with
supporters
and
the
media.
So,
is
it
really
meaningful
-­‐
or
indeed
useful
-­‐
to
apply
socio-­‐analytic
principles
in
an
experiential
sense
when
the
traditional
boundaries
of
time,
task
and
territory
are
so
fluid?
How,
for
example,
can
one
consult
to
an
online
group?
3.3
Virtual
socio-­‐analysis?
Robert
Young
described
a
very
early
attempt
to
conduct
a
‘group
relations’
type
event
on
the
internet,
commencing
in
1994
and
known
as
NETDYNAMICS.
His
reported
experience
of
the
event,
and
events
that
occurred
around
it,
are
interesting
from
both
an
individual
and
large
group
perspective.
Young
reported
that
members
felt
the
attempt
to
reproduce
a
study
group
online
was
a
failure.
He
said:
I
experienced
it
as
a
closed
group
with
its
own
rhetoric,
referring
to
interactions
and
issues
which
I
could
not
get
into.
All
the
other
groups
to
which
I
belonged
(fifty-­‐four
of
them)
were
based
on
issues
or
tasks,
e.g.,
psychoanalysis
or
psychotherapy
or
the
administration
of
forums
or
the
use
of
software.
This
one
had
7

8. BETA
version
only
itself
as
an
object
of
study.
I
found
myself
in
the
unusual
position
of
‘lurker’,
the
term
for
someone
who
reads
the
postings
but
never
sends
any
or
many
to
the
forum.
In
fact,
most
people
on
most
forums
do
not
join
in
very
often,
and
many
do
not
do
so
at
all.
They
lurk
and
are
suspected
of
voyeurism.
My
response
to
a
large
group,
e.g.,
the
large
group
at
a
group
relations
conference,
is
usually
not
to
keep
my
head
down
but
-­‐
as
if
threatened
by
drowning
-­‐
to
seek
to
encompass
the
whole
by
intervening,
a
version
of
swimming
like
mad.
In
this
case,
I
just
couldn’t.
I
couldn’t
even
individuate
the
different
voices
on
the
forum.5
After
some
debate
about
the
success
or
otherwise
of
the
forum,
it
membership
were
shocked
to
discover
that
its
founder
and
‘leader’
had
taken
his
own
life.
Following
his
death,
details
of
a
lonely
and
alienated
life
emerged
via
the
forum,
along
with
hitherto
unrevealed
information
about
recent
job
loss
and
relationship
breakdown.
It
seemed
that
the
founder
had
chosen
to
edit
parts
of
his
life,
leaving
members
with
the
feeling
that
they
had
not
‘known’
him,
even
though
he
had
been
an
active
contributor
to
the
forum.
According
to
Young,
forum
discussions
appeared
to
reorganize
around
themes
of
mourning
and
guilt
for
not
having
known
or
being
able
to
prevent
the
death
of
the
founder.
Although
Young
did
not
make
this
interpretation,
it
appears
as
though
the
tragic
death
of
the
NETDYNAMICS
founder
may
have
allowed
forum
members
to
finally
discover
a
task
which
enabled
them
to
connect
with
each
other;
eg.
around
their
own
experiences
of,
and
feelings
about,
suicide.
I
participated
in
a
recent
attempt
to
conduct
an
online
socio-­‐analytic
activity
using
social
media
which
used
a
somewhat
similar
discussion
forum
platform
to
NETDYNAMICS.
The
event
was
titled
a
‘Virtual
Large
Study
Group’
(VLSG)
with
the
task
being
to
study
the
behaviour
of
the
group.
It
took
place
over
a
number
of
weeks
using
a
discussion
board
format
in
which
participants
could
post
text
(and
other
media),
and
respond
to
the
text
of
others.
The
posts
appeared
in
sequential
order
in
a
linear
fashion.
There
were
three
consultants
and
no
information
about
the
number
or
names
of
participants
was
given
to
members.
All
posts
were
removed
from
view
at
the
close
of
the
event.
I
cannot
recall
the
task
of
the
VLSG,
but
I
think
it
would
be
fair
to
say
that
the
aim
was
to
study
the
behaviour
of
a
large
group
using
social
media,
rather
than
attempting
to
study
social
media
using
a
large
group.
My
experience
of
the
VLSG
was,
unsurprisingly
perhaps,
quite
different
to
any
large
study
group
I
have
participated
in.
However,
this
was
not
just
because
most
of
the
communication
was
conducted
via
quite
lengthy
text
posts,
or
because
there
was
little
‘real
time’
dialogue
between
members.
The
major
difference
was
not
the
absence
of
boundaries,
but
that
the
time
and
‘territory’
boundaries
did
not
seem
appropriate
to
the
task.
I
am
thinking
about
‘territory’
boundaries
simultaneously
as
both
the
physical
location
from
which
I
participated
in
the
VLSG
(which
varied)
and
the
architecture
of
the
application
being
used.
At
no
point
did
I
feel
like
a
member
of
a
group,
large
or
small,
and
the
sense
of
‘connectedness’
I
normally
associate
with
group
membership.
It
was
as
if
I
was
floating
between
a
number
of
disconnected
statements,
rather
than
becoming
immersed
in
a
conversation.
The
experience
of
being
in
the
VLSG
was
dispersed
across
and
mixed
in
with
other
activities
in
my
life:
making
dinner,
preparing
for
bed,
having
breakfast,
travelling
to
and
from
work.
Occasionally,
I
used
my
smartphone
to
interact
with
the
VLSG,
meaning
that
I
was
physically
present
with
people
other
than
members
of
the
VLSG.
It
seemed
to
me
that,
as
with
Young’s
experience
of
NETDYNAMICS,
the
attempt
to
conduct
a
large
study
group
using
social
media
did
not
really
work
as
intended:
the
consultants
were
unable
to
hold
boundaries
in
the
way
that
is
possible
when
members
are
gathered
together
in
the
same
room.
At
times
I
had
the
impression
that
we
were
all
trying
to
behave
as
if
we
were
present
in
a
large
study
group,
making
the
kinds
of
observations
and
interpretations
that
are
familiar
to
large
study
group
participants,
although
this
didn’t
fit
the
reality
of
my
experience.
It
was
as
though
there
was
an
assumption
being
made
that
the
‘virtual
world’
is
simply
a
reflection
of
the
‘real
world’,
and
that
thinking
and
behaviour
employed
in
the
latter
can
be
directly
transplanted
into
the
latter;
for
example,
that
text
posts
were
somehow
the
equivalent
of
speech,
that
contributing
to
an
online
discussion
forum
using
a
smartphone
is
equivalent
to
sitting
a
room
with
participants.
As
I
will
discuss
later
in
the
paper,
part
of
the
issue
may
be
the
ready
acceptance
of
the
common
assumption
that
a
‘virtual
world’
exists
separately
from
a
‘real
world’.
5
http://human-­‐nature.com/rmyoung/papers/prim.html
8

9. BETA
version
A
similar
experience
of
meeting
colleagues
in
Second
Life
to
plan
for
Members'
Day
of
the
2011
ISPSO
Symposium
was
also
illuminating
in
this
regard.
Unlike
the
VLSG,
all
members
were
participating
at
the
same
time,
although
in
different
international
time
zones,
using
avatars
as
proxies.
The
meeting
'took
place'
in
a
room
on
the
virtual
campus
of
Fielding
Graduate
University,
with
members
communicating
by
both
voice
and
text-­‐based
chat.
While
the
majority
of
participants
had
experience
of
socio-­‐analytic
thinking,
many
possessed
only
limited
experience
of
Second
Life,
especially
in
relation
to
interacting
with
others.
The
experience
itself
felt
chaotic
initially,
as
participants
discovered
the
various
features
of
the
Second
Life
environment,
and
how
to
control
avatars.
It
was
difficult
to
think,
and
to
connect
with
participants
whom
one
had
not
previously
met
in
'physics
life'.
Nevertheless,
development
occurred
over
the
course
of
two
meetings,
with
participants
learning
how
to
communicate
and
interact,
and
the
experience
felt
'alive'
and
playful
in
a
way
that
the
VLSG
had
not.
In
my
view,
this
was
possible
firstly
because
of
the
presence
of
an
experienced
and
enthusiastic
Second
Life
'guide',
whose
knowledge
participants
were
able
to
draw
on
as
a
resource
-­‐
a
kind
of
'socio-­‐technical
support'
as
it
were.
Secondly,
participants
were
emboldened
to
'let
go'
of
pre-­‐conceptions
about
how
a
socio-­‐analytic
encounter
should
unfold.
I
would
argue
that
any
attempt
to
directly
translate
some
of
the
'classic'
assumptions
of
group
relations
and
psychodynamic
systems
theory
to
online
(or
'virtual')
groups
risks
misunderstanding
the
unique
properties
of
these
new
social
media.
I
am
suggesting
here
that
while
socio-­‐analytic
principles
continue
to
offer
a
important
conceptual
framework
for
the
investigation
of
social
relations,
socio-­‐analytic
methodologies,
based
as
they
are
on
traditional
organisational
forms,
may
themselves
require
'regeneration'
to
remain
relevant
in
a
‘digital
society’.
Into
what
forms,
then,
might
regenerated
socio-­‐analytic
methods
evolve
in
a
way
that
is
aware
of
the
properties,
and
also
the
effects,
of
social
media
and
the
electronic
networks
on
which
they
are
hosted?
To
explore
this
question
I
discuss
the
unique
analytical
framework
developed
by
media
theorist
Marshall
McLuhan.
4.
Understanding
social
media
Marshall
McLuhan’s
work
on
media
has
often
been
credited
with
predicting
the
proliferation
and
social
impact
of
the
internet.
Indeed,
he
was
made
‘patron
saint’
of
hip
IT
magazine
Wired.
Yet
his
major
work
Understanding
Media,
published
in
1964,
more
than
30
years
before
use
of
the
internet
started
to
become
widespread,
focused
primarily
on
the
effects
of
then
then-­‐dominant
electronic
medium:
television.
Although
some
of
the
terms
he
coined,
such
as
‘the
medium
is
the
message’
and
the
‘global
village’,
are
still
referenced
today,
it
would
be
fair
to
say
that
his
work
is
not
widely
understood,
even
within
the
field
of
media
and
communications
theory.
McLuhan
sought
to
create
awareness
of
the
effects
of
media
on
society,
particularly
new
media,
and
his
social
theories
have
been
criticized
as
overly
materialistic,
with
some
critics
interpreting
his
work
as
implying
that
social
change
is
ultimately
driven
by
changes
in
communications
technology.
His
ideas
about
the
relationship
between
the
physical
senses,
the
central
nervous
system
and
technology
have
also
been
criticized
as
having
no
scientific
basis
in
biology
or
neurology.
Despite
these
criticisms,
it
seems
difficult
to
argue
with
McLuhan’s
key
point,
which
he
summarizes
as:
The
printing
press,
the
computer,
and
television
are
not
.
.
.
simply
machines
which
convey
information.
They
are
metaphors
through
which
we
conceptualize
reality
in
one
way
or
another.
They
will
classify
the
world
for
us,
sequence
it,
frame
it,
enlarge
it,
reduce
it,
argue
a
case
for
what
it
is
like.
Through
these
media
metaphors,
we
do
not
see
the
world
as
it
is.
We
see
it
as
our
coding
systems
are.
Such
is
the
power
of
the
form
of
information.
Three
of
his
key
concepts
resonate
strongly
with
the
socio-­‐analytic
perspective
and,
I
believe,
help
to
point
the
way
to
new
socio-­‐analytic
methods
that
would
be
in
tune
with
a
society
in
which
electronic
networks
such
as
the
internet
are
increasingly
dominant:
1. Media
extend
consciousness
in
time
and
space
2. The
form
of
media
influence
psychic
and
social
organization
‘the
medium
is
the
message’
3. Social
dynamics
in
the
electronic
era
assume
the
form
of
a
'global
village'
9

10. BETA
version
4.1
Media
as
‘extensions
of
man’
Communications
media,
for
Marshall
McLuhan,
are
not
simply
mechanisms
for
transmitting
information.
In
addition,
he
contends,
all
media
serve
to
extend
and
amplify
one
or
more
of
the
physical
senses.
Just
as
the
wheel
extends
the
capacity
of
the
foot
to
travel,
the
medium
of
writing
extends
the
sense
of
sight.
Similarly,
just
as
clothes
or
the
walls
of
a
house
extend
the
sense
of
touch,
the
medium
of
speech
extends
the
sense
of
hearing
across
space
and
time.
According
to
McLuhan,
the
stimulation
of
a
particular
sense
dims
the
experience
of
the
others.
He
provides
a
number
of
examples
of
how
dulling
a
particular
sense
can
heighten
awareness
of
the
others,
such
as
how
lowering
the
lighting
in
a
restaurant
and
providing
a
quiet
atmosphere,
dims
the
visual
and
auditory
senses
thereby
heightening
the
senses
of
taste,
smell
and
touch.
The
prominence
of
particular
kinds
of
media
technology
in
a
society,
McLuhan
argues,
will
correlate
with
what
he
calls
its
'sensory
balance'.
Thus,
there
will
be
certain
societies,
or
cultures,
which
he
describes
as
having
a
'visual'
emphasis,
others
which
may
have
an
'audio-­‐
tactile'
emphasis
(unfortunately
he
doesn't
specifically
refer
to
cultures
which
could
be
considered
'olfactory'
or
'gustatory').
The
differences
between
visual
and
audio-­‐tactile
cultures,
in
McLuhan's
view,
stem
from
the
specific
properties
of
the
dominant
sense
or
senses.
The
difference
between
hearing
and
seeing,
according
to
McLuhan,
is
that
the
ear
is
essentially
non-­‐directional,
and
promotes
feelings
of
immersion
and
intimacy.
The
eye,
by
contrast,
relies
on
a
directional
gaze,
tending
to
distance
the
viewer
from
subject
and
promoting
a
sense
of
separation
of
what
is
in
view
from
what
isn't.
By
way
of
example,
McLuhan
points
to
sense
of
closeness
than
can
be
achieved
via
the
radio
and
the
telephone,
as
contemporary
examples
of
the
feeling
of
‘intimacy’
he
describes6.
The
ear
perceives
sound
independently
of
the
direction
from
which
it
emanates,
as
opposed
to
the
eyes
which
only
perceive
in
one
direction
at
a
time.
The
immersive
nature
of
sound,
McLuhan
argues,
tends
to
favour
specific
kinds
of
social
experiences
and
relations.
The
first
and
foremost
of
these
is
the
tribe,
in
which
social
meaning
is
provided
by
storytellers,
bards
and
musicians:
the
‘Tribal
Voice’,
as
McLuhan
terms
it.
In
an
aural
culture,
social
groupings
take
particular
forms
that
permit
verbal
interaction.
The
speech
of
the
tribal
elders
is
the
source
of
authority,
and
history
is
passed
on
through
oral/aural
tradition.
McLuhan
also
regards
the
tribal
form
as
having
a
tactile
quality,
expressed
through
the
media
of
dance,
music
making
and
carving.
The
sense
of
touch,
like
the
sense
of
hearing,
is
also
immersive.
Tribal
life,
for
McLuhan,
is
therefore
close-­‐knit
and
immersive,
with
the
emphasis
on
group
experience
rather
than
on
the
individual.
Individuality
is
conceptualised
as
'role'
-­‐
that
is,
only
in
relation
to
the
group.
Groups
are
small,
perhaps
organised
in
villages,
and
internally
focused,
with
bodily
functions
performed
'in
public',
as
it
were,
although
the
distinction
between
private
and
public
has
little
meaning.
Visual
cultures,
on
the
other
hand,
are
marked
by
the
distinction
between
subject
and
object
-­‐
the
'point
of
view',
in
McLuhan's
shorthand.
Characteristic
features
are
specialisation,
hierarchy
and
an
emphasis
on
the
individual.
Authority
is
exercised
from
the
centre
to
margin
via
mechanical
media
-­‐
roads,
sea-­‐borne
trade
routes,
and
railways.
The
organising
principle
of
visual
culture
is
hierarchical
and
linear
'one
thing
following
another',
the
organising
principle
of
oral-­‐tactile
culture
is
the
mesh
or
mosaic:
'everything
at
once'.
For
McLuhan,
the
crucial
technologies
which
enable
visual
culture
were
the
invention
of
the
phonetic
alphabet,
followed
by
the
development
of
the
printing
press.
According
to
McLuhan,
the
phonetic
alphabet,
through
its
ability
to
translate
'sound
into
sight',
represents
a
seismic
shift
in
the
way
the
world
is
experienced.
Unlike
pictographic
writing
in
which
visual
symbols
correspond
to
set
meanings,
the
phonetic
alphabet
represents
specific
sounds
through
otherwise
meaningless
characters.
It
therefore
allows
the
sound
of
speech
to
be
transmitted
and
reproduced
across
space
and
time
on
tablets
and
parchment.
For
the
first
time
it
was
feasible
for
the
voice
of
the
tribal
leader
or
king
to
be
heard
far
from
their
seat
of
power,
and
roads
were
constructed
to
enable
messengers
to
transmit
orders
and
proclamations.
Thus,
the
advent
of
phonetic
language
allowed
the
authority
of
the
spoken
word
to
be
exercised
as
a
distance,
setting
the
scene
for
the
establishment
of
empires.
6
This
may
explain
the
attraction
of
late-­‐night
talk-­‐back
radio
to
lonely
listeners.
10

11. BETA
version
The
phonetic
alphabet
is
a
unique
technology.
There
have
been
many
kinds
of
writing,
pictographic
and
syllabic,
but
there
is
only
one
phonetic
alphabet
in
which
semantically
meaningless
letters
are
used
to
correspond
to
semantically
meaningless
sounds.
This
stark
division
and
parallelism
between
a
visual
and
an
auditory
world
was
both
crude
and
ruthless,
culturally
speaking.
The
phonetically
written
word
sacrifices
worlds
of
meaning
and
perception
that
were
secured
by
forms
like
the
hieroglyph
and
the
Chinese
ideogram.
(p
91)
The
spread
of
the
phonetic
alphabet
corresponded
with
a
stress
on
the
visual,
and
the
primacy
and
authority
of
the
written
(as
opposed
to
spoken)
word.
For
McLuhan,
this
splitting
of
the
visual
from
the
aural
also
prompted
the
splitting
of
subject
from
object,
and
gradually
led
to
specialisation
of
knowledge
and
skills,
of
the
emergence
of
science,
and
eventually
resulting
in
the
emergence
of
the
machine.
This
process
of
specialisation
and
distribution
of
authority
from
centre
to
margin
was
drastically
accelerated
by
the
invention
of
the
ultimate
machine:
the
printing
press.
Indeed,
the
phonetic
alphabet
enables
the
splitting
of
experience
into
unitary
fragments
to
be
reassembled
in
linear
sequences
is
what
made
the
machine
possible:
Only
alphabetic
cultures
have
ever
mastered
connected
lineal
sequences
as
pervasive
forms
of
psychic
social
organization.
The
breaking
up
of
every
kind
of
experience
into
uniform
units
in
order
to
produce
faster
action
and
change
of
form
(applied
knowledge)
has
been
the
secret
of
Western
power
over
man
and
nature
alike.
(p
93)
This
fragmentation
and
ordering
of
experiences
can
be
discerned
in
the
visual
structure
of
organisations,
buildings,
taxonomies
and
genealogies
which
characterise
the
industrial
age.
McLuhan
regards
the
printing
press
as
the
primary
engine
for
the
complete
domination
of
Western
societies
and
their
colonies
by
visual
culture
through
the
dissemination
of
laws,
maps,
architectural
plans,
engineering
drawings,
scientific
treatises,
reference
books,
journals,
newspapers,
political
manifestos,
instruction
manuals,
novels
-­‐
all
of
which
emphasise
in
some
way
the
separation
of
individual
and
society.
Instead
of
what
McLuhan
characterises
as
the
'tribal
web
of
kinship
relations',
individuals
become
related
to
each
other
through
nation-­‐states
as
citizens,
or
through
membership
of
firms
and
organisations.
This
visual-­‐mechanical
specialist
culture
is
also
one
in
which
the
dis-­‐eases
of
the
individual
psyche
(hysteria,
neurosis,
anxiety,
stress)
and
of
groups
(alienation,
anomie)
become
possible.
Various
specialist
disciplines
have
developed
to
understand
and
cure
such
conditions:
medicine,
neurology,
psychology,
sociology,
economics,
political
science,
etc.
Yet,
through
their
focus
on
a
single
aspect
of
experience,
grounded
as
they
are
in
machines
and
the
printed
word,
such
disciplines
themselves
express
and
reproduce
the
visual-­‐mechanical
bias
which
gives
rise
to
the
ills
they
seek
to
remedy.
As
McLuhan
suggests:
Our
mechanical
technologies
for
extending
and
separating
the
functions
of
our
physical
beings
have
brought
us
near
to
a
state
of
disintegration
by
putting
us
out
of
touch
with
ourselves.
It
may
very
well
be
that
in
our
conscious
inner
lives
the
interplay
among
our
senses
is
what
constitutes
the
sense
of
touch.
Perhaps
touch
is
not
just
skin
contact
with
things,
but
the
very
life
of
things
in
the
mind?
(p
117)
The
extension
and
separation
of
functions
to
which
McLuhan
refers
might
be
compared
with
the
splitting
and
projection
which
is
described
by
psychoanalytic
theory,
particularly
as
formulated
by
Melanie
Klein.
Rather
than
simply
operating
within
the
individual
psyche,
however,
he
describes
a
splitting
which
occurs
at
the
level
of
groups
and
societies
via
communications
media.
In
my
view,
this
is
an
overlooked
but
important
aspect
of
his
theory:
by
conceptualising
communications
media
as
extensions
of
the
senses
-­‐
which
constitute
the
surface
of
consciousness,
as
it
were
-­‐
he
is
able
to
directly
link
the
inner
life
of
the
mind
with
external
reality.
Although
McLuhan
has
been
labelled
a
materialist,
his
theory
does
not
depend
on
the
assumption
of
a
causal
link
from
technology
to
psychology;
it
would
be
possible
to
argue
that
visual
media
emerge
and
embody
a
kind
of
paranoid-­‐schizoid
social
defence
against
anxiety.
The
significance
of
his
theory
for
the
psychoanalytic
study
of
organisation
is
that
it
11