Journal 3: McLuhan's "Hot and Cool" in the context of social media.

Marshall McLuhan’s idea that “the medium is the message” is timely and relevant when looking at how algorithmic social media platforms shape the way we consume and interact with content today. He argued that new technologies don’t just deliver messages or entertainment, they change how we interact with the world and with each other​, which is only perpetuated by our feeds, individually curated to our preferences and interests. I argue that these feeds and social media today situates itself in this interesting midpoint of “hot” and “cool” media, where the capabilities of these platforms are very “cool”, but the use case pushed upon the user is very “hot”.

Before these platforms the audience took more of an active role in choosing what media to consume, choosing what TV show to watch, what book to read, and even the early internet required users to make choices of where they wanted to go. In social media there was and still is some user agency in how we shape our feeds, users can choose who and what they want to follow and see content from, but the algorithm picks up on this, and these feeds try to remove this agency and give us content that the algorithm thinks we would watch for as long as possible, which showcases a shift from social media as a social connectivity and “cool” media, to a more consumerist and “hot” media. There are still active “cool” aspects to this however, users can choose to like or comment on posts or even other comments they come across, but this all is fed back into the algorithm, and an interaction such as a “like” or a comment signals that the user is more likely to engage in similar content. Much to McLuhan’s ideas, these individualized feeds aren't just showing recommended content, they’re reshaping attention spans, social interactions, and even what we believe to be important. Instead of actively deciding what to watch, the algorithm decides for us on a certain level, making the experience much more passive than in the past.

McLuhan also talked about “autoamputation”, the idea that when technology extends a part of us, we tend to lose awareness of that extension​. I’d argue that humans are already part cyborg, having pieces of technology like phones, laptops, and smart watches already physically attached to us, and our online presence is attached to us in a similar way, only perceptually instead of physically. Even more so a user's feed is analogous to an extension of our personality and interests, but it numbs the ability to critically engage with what we’re seeing. I think McLuhan bringing up the Narcissus effect is extremely relevant in this regard: our feeds are like our own reflection, or in this case, a digital mirror of our preferences.

I think it’s fascinating and a little spooky that McLuhan was basically predicting where we are now, with recommended feeds putting people in a cycle where the way content is delivered changes the way we think. I don’t think this means people should stop consuming social media content or things that interest them, but to be a little more intentional and mindful in what they are consuming, where it’s coming from, and how it’s making them think.