Global Village People

In his revelatory works The Gutenberg Galaxy (1962) and Understanding Media (1964), Marshall McLuhan predicts that connecting the world through technology will not lead to further unification. Rather, the connective powers of electricity, and the technical media built on top of it, will turn the world into a global village. As information travels rapidly across the globe, traditional distinctions between local and global, as well as between different cultures, are eroded. The concept of global village designates a contraction of space and time, creating a sense of simultaneous existence for people worldwide.

To understand this concept in today’s terms, imagine how social media platforms like Twitter or Facebook allow news and trends to spread globally within minutes. A protest in Hong Kong can inspire activists in New York almost instantaneously, exemplifying this collapse of geographical and temporal barriers.

Paradoxically, while the implosion of time and space effaces some differences, it accentuates and heightens others. McLuhan prophesizes that an omnipresence of technical media will lead to a new age of tribalism. Besides its homogenizing effects, it will also increase the clashes between cultural, political, and religious tribes. His words ring eerily true in our current digital landscape:

Today, after more than a century of electric technology, we have extended our central nervous system itself in a global embrace, abolishing both space and time as far as our planet is concerned.

This tribalism manifests in the echo chambers and filter bubbles we see online today. For instance, social media algorithms tend to show us content that aligns with our existing beliefs, reinforcing our “tribal” identities. The rise of niche online communities, from Reddit subcultures to Discord servers, further illustrates this digital tribalism.

Considering the current landscape of the internet, it is safe to say that McLuhan was spot on with his predictions. The modern web is akin to a bustling village. On its busy street corners we find competing tribes. Their members are either claiming and defending the superiority of their own truths and values, or they are disqualifying and ridiculing those of others. It is thus not far-fetched to claim that the term global village also hints at the narrow mindedness of its inhabitants.

Yet, these clashes extend far beyond mere content or ideological disputes. In Gramophone, Film, Typewriter (1987), Friedrich Kittler aptly frames the essence of these media wars as a struggle for control over the conduits that transmit words, sounds, and images. Our media are overloaded with entertaining distractions thinly veiled as information. Bread and circus provides a captivating backdrop to the overarching battle for dominion over the channels of communication.

To put this in contemporary terms, think of the ongoing debates about net neutrality, or the increasing concerns over big tech companies’ control of social media platforms. These are modern manifestations of the struggle for control over communication channels that Kittler foresaw.

Kittler’s observations on this power struggle are particularly illuminating:

The Pentagon is engaged in far-sighted planning: only the substitution of optical fibers for metal cables can accommodate the enormous rates and volumes of bits required, spent, and celebrated by electronic warfare. […] In the meantime, pleasure is produced as a by-product: people are free to channel-surf between entertainment media.

This “pleasure as a by-product” that Kittler mentions is evident in how we consume media today. While we scroll through entertaining content on TikTok or binge-watch series on Netflix, underlying battles for data control and digital infrastructure are taking place.

Cambridge Analytica’s manipulation of Facebook data for political purposes, the spread of misinformation during recent elections worldwide, the rebranding of Twitter to X and its policy changes, and the rise of deep fakes are all manifestations of this covert war. Those who are in charge of the channels are freed from the burden to defend their truths and values. Such power dynamics lie at the root of the current internet fragmentation.

In the face of this complex digital battleground, it’s tempting to resort to old dichotomies when looking for perpetrators and saviors. However, in the global village, nothing is simple; every relation is complex. The fact that the government is not your enemy does not make it your friend. Not all companies are evil, but do not trust anyone that says they are not. And despite the name, doing good may not always be the philanthropist’s true motivation.

Consider, for example, the dual nature of government surveillance. While it may protect against certain threats, it also raises privacy concerns. Similarly, tech companies often provide valuable services while simultaneously collecting vast amounts of personal data.

Amidst this moral ambiguity, virtue signaling emerges as a curious phenomenon. It needs to be understood as the ultimate sign of moral confusion: an expression of complete and utter doubt. “Am I truly a good person?” Any attempt to answer this question is in vain. Instead, we need to short-circuit the tribal, monotheistic logic that underlies it for once and for all.

By “tribal, monotheistic logic,” we mean the tendency to view complex issues in black and white terms, or to believe that there’s only one right way of thinking or behaving. This mindset often leads to the polarization we see in online debates about politics, religion, or even pop culture.

While there may very well be an objective truth, clear good and evil, and pure beauty, we all have to come to terms with the fact that we will never agree on it. Hence, it does not really matter. Pragmatically, value pluralism is the only way forward. This means acknowledging and respecting the existence of multiple, often conflicting, but equally valid moral and cultural viewpoints.

In our digital global village, embracing value pluralism could mean actively seeking out diverse perspectives online, engaging in respectful dialogue with those we disagree with, and being open to changing our views. It’s about navigating the complexities of our interconnected world with empathy and critical thinking, rather than retreating into the comfort of our digital tribes.