Book Review: "Technopoly" by Neil Postman

I watch YouTube videos like every other person and when I choose my YouTube watches, I like to go for something long and in-depth. This is mainly so I don't have to change the channel, or even reach for the remote. But sometimes, I find videos that are intense and well worth my attention as well. One of the videos I watched mentioned a man by the name of Neil Postman and upon looking him up I found out that I could get his book Technopoly for free on my phone. So here we are some time later and I think I had a good time with this book though it was a bit shorter than what I had in mind to read. I would like to read his book Amusing Ourselves to Death but that is way too expensive for me at the moment.

First of all, we have to define some terminology. We have three different 'cultures' in this book that our author tells us the meanings of - these will prove important for understanding not only what's happening but the transitions between each one. Tool-using cultures use technology to support a worldview rooted in religion or tradition (e.g: Medieval Europe). Tools serve culture - this is the main point. Technocracies (e.g: the Industrial Revolution) see technology compete with older worldviews; tools begin shaping culture, and that's where we are starting to move closer to our own time. It's more modern and seen as progressive.

Finally, Technopoly is the final stage, where technology becomes the dominant worldview, absorbing or eliminating competing forms of human meaning. And this is where we are now, which is relatively depressing. His point is that most of the Western World (and probably most of the world itself) has moved into a state where technology determines culture, not the other way around.

Technopoly emerges when technological thinking becomes the measure of all things - basically, everything becomes data - even we become data. The author argues that in this state, technological advancement is the measure of everything, even the purpose of life itself. No longer do we worship on the altars of religion and science, but instead we give our purpose to these corporations who seek to make us into data simply to advance their own purpose - which is purely technological. Therefore, technology then ceases to be merely a tool and becomes an ideology.

The author also critiques the cultural authority we grant to “experts” and technical specialists. As societies become technopolies, experts claim the right to define reality in their specialised domains - this is a dangerous prospect if taken to far, and you can only guess what happened therefore. Psychology and economics gain power because they offer measurable, operational definitions of human behaviour. Individuals then outsource their own meaning to these weird 'specialists' who don't actually hold all the answers. A fragmented expertise is replacing holistic judgement and to be honest, that is probably not the best thing to ever happen.

The author shows how technological change transforms culture by altering environments. I think we all know by now that technologies are not neutral and don't exist in a vacuum. Each one reshapes how people think, perceive, and organise society. For example: print creates linear, rational thinking whereas, television privileges imagery, entertainment, and immediacy. Technopoly fuses all symbolic environments into technology’s preferred mode: speed, novelty and market logic. Logic overwhelms and we all become a result of an algorithm. Novelty is something that this short-form video culture works off and we can only imagine why (sarcasm intended). This aspect though makes another important point: media has become an environment and it has the ability to alter our mental health and states. In a 'technopoly', I'm not sure that is a good thing.

Another point is that education also becomes subservient to technology and the information economy along the way. Schools shift from sites of cultural transmission to sites of job training and well, that's why we get so many people who now lack basic information that only a decade or two ago would've seemed normal to have. The author argues that students are taught skills but not meaning, values, or cultural history and so, they don't understand things as narratives to learn from but rather statistics to be used and applied, even if to the wrong situation.

The book goes through the need for resistance but I do think that the reality the book covers is a bit surface layer. There is something much deeper and darker not being covered for whatever reason - however, maybe it's just because the book is old and short. Well, Neil Postman, I'm sure you know it is so much worse now than you could've ever imagined. Or maybe you just predicted it.