Media Ecology – (Un)necessary Research Perspective in Communication and Media Studies

• Authors: Małgorzata Laskowska , Krzysztof Marcyński
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

The aim of this review and theoretical study is to determine the importance of media ecology theory for communication and media studies. Bearing in mind this research goal, the following research questions were asked: What is the media ecology theory? What approach to media and communication research does it represent? What research perspectives are proposed in the field of media ecology? What new can media ecology bring to communication and media studies? An additional objective of the article, and, at the same, time the intention of the authors, is to raise the interest of Polish researchers in the subject of media ecology and its various aspects, enriching research in the field of communication and media studies.

Keywords

EN

media ecology; methodology; media nature; communication and media studies

• Publisher: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Marii Curie-Skłodowskiej
• Journal: Mediatization Studies
• Year: 2019
• Volume: 3

Dates

published

2019

online

2019-10-16

Contributors

author

Małgorzata Laskowska

author

Krzysztof Marcyński

References

• Anton C. (2016). On the Roots of Media Ecology: A Micro-History and Philosophical Clarifiation. Philosophies, Vol. 1, pp. 126–132.
• Begon M., Townsend C.R., Harper J.L. (2006). Ecology. From Individuals to Ecosystems. Blackwell Publishing: New Jersey.
• Birdwhistell R.L. (1952). Introduction to Kinesics: An Annotation System for Analysis of Body Motion and Gesture. University of Louisville: St. Louisville.
• Birdwhistell R.L. (1970). Kinesics and Context: Essays on Body Motion Communication. University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia.
• Burke K. (1968). Medium as message. In: R. Rosenthal (Ed.), McLuhan: Pro & Con. Funk & Wagnalls: New York, pp. 165–177.
• Cantril H. (1940). The Invasion from Mars: A Study in the Psychology of Panic. Princeton University Press: Princeton.
• Christian W. (2015). Harold Innis. Historica Canada: Toronto, http://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/harold-innis/, 1.05.2018.
• Eisenstein E. (1979). Th Printing Press as an Agent of Change. Communications and Cultural Transformations in Early Modern Europe (2 Vols.). Cambridge University Press: New York.
• Eisenstein E. (1983). Th Printing Revolution in Early Modern Europe. Cambridge University Press: New York.
• Ellul J. (1954). La Technique ou l’Enjeu du siècle. Economica: Paris.
• Ellul J. (1964). Th technological society. Trans. J. Wilkinson. Vintage Books: New York.
• Ellul J. (1965). L’Illusion politique. La Table Ronde: Paris.
• Ellul J. (1980). L’empire du non-sens: L’art et la société technicienne. Presses Universitaires de France: Paris.
• Ellul J. (1988). Le bluf technologique. Hachette: Paris.
• Gackowski T. (2013). Mediatyzacja polityki – rzecz o niesamowitości Internetu, http://www.medioznawca.com/blogi/blog-medialny/41-mediatyzacja-polityki-rzecz-o-niesamowitosciinternetu, 11.06.2018.
• Gambino R. (1972). McLuhanism: A massage that muddles. Midwest Quarterly, Vol. 14(1), pp. 53–62.
• Goban-Klas T. (2009). Media i komunikowanie masowe. Teorie i analizy prasy, radia, telewizji i Internetu. Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN: Warszawa.
• Goody J. (1987). Th Interface between the Written and the Oral. Cambridge University Press: Cambridge.
• Greenman J.P., Schuchardt R.M., Toly N.J. (2012). Understanding Jacques Ellul. James Clarke & Co Ltd: Cambridge.
• Hall E.T. (1959). The Silent Language. Doubleday: Garden City.
• Havelock E.A. (1957). The Liberal Temper in Greek Politics. Yale University Press: New Haven.
• Havelock E.A. (1963). Preface to Plato. Harvard University Press. Cambridge.
• Havelock E.A. (1977). The Preliteracy of the Greeks. New Literary History, Vol. 8(3), p. 369.
• Havelock E.A. (1981). The Literate Revolution in Greece and its Cultural Consequences. Princeton University Press: Princeton.
• Havelock E.A. (1986). The Muse Learns to Write: Reflections on Orality and Literacy from Antiquity to the Present. Yale University Press: New Haven.
• Hayakawa S.I., Hayakawa A.R. (1990). Language in Thought and Action. Houghton Mifflin: Harcourt.
• Heisenberg W. (2007). Physics and Philosophy: Th Revolution in Modern Science. Harper Perennial: New York.
• Innis H. (1923). A History of the Canadian Pacific Railway. Revised edition (1971). University of Toronto Press: Toronto.
• Innis H. (1950). The Fur Trade in Canada. Empire and Communications. Clarendon Press: Oxford.
• Innis H. (1951). The Bias of Communication. University of Toronto Press: Toronto.
• Jabłonowski M., Gackowski T. (2012). Tożsamość nauk o mediach. Obszary, perspektywy, postulaty. Studia Medioznawcze, Vol. 2(49), pp. 15–24.
• Jakubowicz K. (2011). Nowa ekologia mediów. Poltext: Warszawa.
• Kopecka-Piech K. (2015). Mediatyzacja przez aplikatyzację. Mobilna hybrydyzacja, wielozadaniowość i współdzielenie. Zeszyty Prasoznawcze, nr 1.
• Korzybski A. (1994). Science and Sanity: An Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and General Semantics. Institute of GS: New York.
• Levinson P. (2012). New New Media. Penguin: New York.
• Levi-Strauss C. (1966). The Savage Mind. Librairie Plon: Paris.
• Lum C.M.K. (2000). Introduction: Th intellectual roots of media ecology. New Jersey Journal of Communication, Vol. 8(1), p. 3.
• Lum C.M.K. (2006). Perspectives on Culture, Technology and Communication: The Media Ecology Tradition. Hampton Press: Cresskill.
• Mackenzie A., Ball A.S., Virdee S.R. (2007). Krótkie wykłady. Ekologia. Tłum. K. Dmowski, A. Kozakiewicz, M. Kozakiewicz. Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN: Warszawa.
• Magdziarz-Lisowska M. (2004). Analiza zawartości mediów. Przewodnik dla studentów. Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Jagiellońskiego: Kraków.
• Manovich L. (2013a). Media after software. Journal of Visual Culture, Vol. 1, pp. 30–37.
• Manovich L (2013b). Software Takes Command. Bloomsbury Academic: New York.
• Marchand P. (1998). Marshall McLuhan. Th Medium and the Messenger. MIT Press: Cambridge.
• Marcyński K. (2016). Komunikacja religijna i media. Petrus: Kraków.
• McLuhan M. (1962a). Galaktyka Gutenberga. Tłum. A. Wojtasik. Narodowe Centrum Kultury: Warszawa.
• McLuhan M. (1962b). The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man. University of Toronto Press: Toronto.
• McLuhan M. (1964). Understanding Media. Routledge: London.
• McLuhan M., Fiore Q. (2001). War and Peace in the Global Village. Gingko Press: Berkeley.
• Meyrowitz J. (1986). Television and interpersonal behavior: Codes of perception and response. In: G. Gumpert, R. Cathcart (Eds.), Inter/media: Interpersonal Communication in a Media World. Oxford University Press: New York, pp. 253–272.
• Meyrowitz J. (2001). Morphing McLuhan: Medium theory for a new millennium. Proceedings of the Media Ecology Association, Vol. 2, pp. 8–22.
• Milberry K. (2012). Media Ecology, https://www.oxfordbibliographies.com/abstract/document/obo-9780199756841/obo-9780199756841-0054.xml?rskey=GxV4j2&result=109, 18.05.2018.
• Mumford L. (1934). Technics and Civilization. Harcourt Brace and Company: New York.
• Mumford L. (1944). The Condition of Man. Harcourt. Brace and Company: New York.
• Mumford L. (1956). The Transformations of Man. Harper and Row: New York.
• Nystrom Ch. (1973). Towards a Science of Media Ecology: The Formulation of Integrated Conceptual Paradigms for the Study of Human Communication Systems (PhD diss.). New York University: New York.
• Ong W.J. (1971). Rhetoric, Romance, and Technology. Cornell University Press: Ithaca.
• Ong W.J. (1977). Interfaces of the Word. Cornell University Press: Ithaca.
• Ong W.J. (1992). Wprowadzenie. In: Oralność i piśmienność. Słowo poddane technologii, W.J. Ong. Tłum. J. Japola. Wydawnictwo KUL: Lublin.
• Ong W.J. (2002). Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word. Routledge: New York.
• Piasta K. (2001). Ekologia mediów – czyli człowiek w środowisku. Brief, Vol. 19, https://opoka.org.pl/biblioteka/X/XB/ekologiamediow.html, 1.05.2018.
• Płużański T. (1977). Człowiek między ziemią a niebem. Wiedza Powszechna: Warszawa.
• Postman N. (1985). Amusing Ourselves to Death. Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business. Viking: New York.
• Postman N. (1992). Technopoly. The Surrender of Culture to Technology. Knopf: New York.
• Postman N. (1998). Five things we need to know about technological change (Denver 27 March 1998), http://www.newtech.org/address10_en.htm, 13.11.2017.
• Postman N. (2000). The humanism of media ecology. Proceedings of the Media Ecology Association, Vol. 1, pp. 10–16.
• Postman N., Nystrom Ch., Strate L., Weingartner Ch. (1987). Myths, Men, and Beer: An Analysis of Beer Commercials on Broadcast Television. American Automobile Association Foundation for Traff Safety: Falls Church.
• Rotkiewicz H. (1983). Pedagogiczne aspekty teorii środków masowego przekazu. Ossolineum: Wrocław.
• Shannon C.E., Weaver W. (1964). The Mathematical Theory of Communication. University of Illinois Press: Chicago.
• Skurczyński Ł. (2016). Żyć znaczy stawiać opór. Ellul dla początkujących. Miesięcznik Ewangelicki, Vol. 2–3(34–35).
• Stearns S.C., Hoekstra R.F. (2000). Evolution: An Introduction. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
• Strate L. (1970). The reformed English curriculum. In: A.C. Eurich (Ed.), High School 1980: The Shape of the Future in American Secondary Education. Pitman: New York, pp. 160–168.
• Strate L. (1999). Understanding MEA. Medias Res, Vol. 1, nr 1; http://www.media-ecology.org/publications/In_Medias_Res/imrv1n1.html, 12.06.2018.
• Strate L. (2000). The humanism of media ecology. Proceedings of the Media Ecology Association, Vol. 1, pp. 10–16.
• Strate L. (2003). The cell phone as environment. Explorations in Media Ecology, Vol. 2(1), pp. 19–24.
• Strate L. (2006). Echoes and Reflctions: On Media Ecology as a Field of Study. Hampton University Press: Cresskill.
• Strate L. (2007). Understanding a man in time: James W. Carey and the media ecology intellectual tradition. Critical Studies in Media Communication, Vol. 24(2), pp. 177–180.
• Strate L. (2018). Amusing, Informing, and Amazing Ourselves to Death: Contemplating the Technological Tempest of the Time, https://york.psu.edu/story/3280/2018/03/09/lance-strate-sharethoughts-media-ecology-and-its-impact-world, 1.09.2019.
• Strate L., Lum C.M.K. (2000). Lewis Mumford and the ecology of technics. New Jersey Journal of Communication, Vol. 8(1), pp. 56–78.
• Szczepaniak K. (2012). Zastosowanie analizy treści w badaniach artykułów prasowych – refleksje metodologiczne. Acta Universitatis Lodziensis. Folia Sociologica. Vol. 42, pp. 83–112.
• Sztumski J. (2010). Wstęp do metod i technik badań społecznych. Wydawnictwo Naukowe „Śląsk”: Katowice.
• Tremblay G. (2012). From Marshall McLuhan to Harold Innis, or From the Global Village to the World Empire. Canadian Journal of Communication, Vol. 37, pp. 561–575.
• Wasiak P. (2013, 19 marca). Megamaszyna i Zeitgeist lat 60. O „Micie maszyny” Lewisa Mumforda. Kultura Liberalna, https://kulturaliberalna.pl/2013/03/19/wasiak-megamaszyna-i-zeitgeistlat-60-o-micie-maszyny-lewisa-mumforda/, 1.05.2018.
• Watzlawick P., Bavelas J.B., Jackson D.D. (1967). Pragmatics of Human Communication: A Study of Interactional Patterns, Pathologies, and Paradoxes. W.W. Norton & Company: New York.
• Wieczorek-Tomaszewska M. (2010). Szkoła Toronto dawniej i dziś. Studium z historii mediów, http://edu-mwt.manifo.com/teoriamediow/get/0036386729d9f97419eb619ce525505c, 01.05.2018.
• Wiener N. (1948). Cybernetics. MIT Press: Cambridge.
• Wiener N. (1950). The Human Use of Human Beings: Cybernetics and Society. Houghton Mifflin: Boston.

Identifiers

DOI

10.17951/ms.2019.3.53-68