The New York Society for General Semantics is proud to present a special event titled “Democracy and Media Ecology” at the historic Players at 16 Gramercy Park South in New York City. Our event will take place on Friday evening, January 27th between 6pm and 9pm, and we hope you’ll register and join us for what promises to be a lively and engaging discussion.

Date: 27 Jan 2023
Time: 6:00 PM – 9:00 PM
Location: The Players NYC – 16 Gramercy Park South, NY, NY

Media ecology entails the study of media as environments. Those things that go between us and what’s “out there” strongly influence the way we think, act, and communicate. Neil Postman famously called media ecology “general semantics writ large.” As our good friend Thom Gencarelli wrote in 2020, reviewing Postman’s role in both fields, “If general semantics considers our semantic environment, or context in which utterances take place, and the fact that the sense and sensibility and result of such utterances are to a great extent determined by that context, then the same holds true when we expand the concept of our semantic environment to consider our various media environments – wherein the nature of the medium, as a context, influences both the nature of utterances offered and the meanings we make from such utterances.”

This point is particularly valuable in attempting to understand how we shape our world through the choices we make in organizing and governing our affairs. Democracy is one system, method, or medium for engaging in that important work and therefore it’s important to consider the democratic shape of things as we seek to improve and progress as human beings. As democratic systems of various types become strained by the pace and intensity of our contemporary condition, we gather to consider what’s going on and what we might do about it.

Each January, the Executive Board of the Media Ecology Association holds its annual meeting in New York City, and the NYSGS is very pleased to have a number of principals of the MEA Board with us to share food, drink, and an evening of intellectual reflection.

Dr. Adriana Braga is Immediate Past President of the MEA and Associate Professor at the Social Communication Department at the Pontifícia Universidade Católica/Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio), Coordinator of the Digital Media Lab and researcher of the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq, Brazil).

Dr. Thom Gencarelli is a Past President of the MEA, Treasurer of the NYSGS, and Editor-in-Chief of the Institute of General Semantics’ journal ETC: A Review of General Semantics. He is Professor and founding Chair of the Communication Department at Manhattan College.

Dr. Fernando Gutiérrez is the long time Executive Secretary of the MEA and the head of the Division of Humanities and Education at the Monterrey Institute of Technology and Higher Education (State of Mexico Campus). Dr. Gutiérrez is an author of several titles about media and information technologies; and part of the National System of Researchers in Mexico. His interest focuses on the exploration of different media environments.

Moderating the evening’s discussion is Dr. Michael Plugh, President of the MEA and the NYSGS. Dr. Plugh is Associate Professor in the Communication Department at Manhattan College.

We hope you’ll drop in to join us. Registration is free, but all attendees must be registered in order to gain admittance to the club. This includes any guests you might want to bring with you.

The program will take place in the Library on the 2nd floor of the club. Please note that, as an historic 19th century landmark, the site is not handicap accessible. Dress code is business casual and is strictly enforced, including no sneakers, shorts, ripped jeans, t-shirts).

Part of my participation

Fernando Gutiérrez

My gratitude to the New York Society for General Semantics for this invitation. My special thanks to Lance Strate and Mike Plugh for organizing this event. Thank you also to all the friends and colleagues who are here tonight to listen and participate in this conversation.

Mike wrote in his invitation for this event that Democracy is a system, method, or medium –and I emphasize the word medium– Democracy as a medium that help us to understand how we shape our world through the choices we make (“in organizing and governing our affairs”). So, I agree with Mike, it’s important to consider the democratic shape of things. Democracy is a medium that allows the empowerment of people and seeks to guarantee equal opportunities for all citizens.

We must remember that the word “democracy” comes from the ancient Greek “dēmokratía” composed of “dēmos” meaning “people” and “kratos” meaning “power”. So, the word “democracy” means “power of the people.” For me, the medium that empowers people. A medium that creates an environment. The democratic environment.

An environment has a set of conditions, factors and elements that affect a system.

The democratic environment has been –for many people and nations– the best political system, so far. However, it should also be considered that this –the democratic system– is not a perfect system and that there are challenges and problems that it faces in its implementation and application. For example, economic and social inequality can make equitable citizen participation difficult, and corruption and undue influence can undermine the integrity of the system itself. Why? Why the democratic system is not perfect?

Because in a certain way, the democratic system is a model, a simplified representation, derived from a process of abstraction. So, a democratic system can be understood as a simplified representation of how a society – just and equitable– should work, in which political power resides in the people. If we want a better system we need to also improve our model and expand our abstraction level.

To build a better democratic system, the most important aspects of a just and equitable society must be selected. In addition to citizen participation, the representation of the interests of citizens, the protection of human rights, equality before the law, political and social stability; which have been represented in a simplified way in the democratic system.

Now, let me explain that democracy, as a medium, goes through the various phases that any other conventional medium also goes through.

From the perspective of Media Ecology, and particularly from the point of view of the media scholar, Marshall McLuhan, it could be said that democracy extends capabilities or functions of the people, but makes others obsolete, such as the representation of minorities; on the other hand, it recovers important aspects such as citizen participation, freedom of expression and the right to information, to mention some of the aspects that we do not find in authoritarian, totalitarian or monarchical systems. Finally, over time, democracy has become something else. What McLuhan would probably have called the reverse of democracy. Because democracy today has become a fragile system, with a lack of adequate mechanisms to avoid manipulation by a few, especially in some countries. In fact, I think that only a few countries have stable and solid democratic systems.

We must think of democracy as any other medium that we must question. For example, how the structure of democracy is perceived by our mind? And how does democracy -like any other medium– intrude, limit, expand or even distort our consciousness? Although it may seem strange to us, the democratic system –from this perspective– is still under construction…

Second part

Now, I will talk about my country, because I think it might interest you a little more. As you know, Mexico is a democratic republic, and has had a democratic political system since the 1920s, after Mexican Revolution.

First, you have to know that for 70 years we lived under the government of a single party, the Institutional Revolutionary Party. Every six years a new person came to the presidency, from the same party (PRI) and appointed by the acting president. For this reason, Mario Vargas LLosa described the political system as the “perfect dictatorship”.

As Enrique Krauze suggest, the control wielded by the PRI governments upon media during the 20th century was almost absolute, and it was crucial for that party’s seventy-year tenure in power (Krauze, 2016).

In September of 1990, the Peruvian writer and Nobel laureate, Mario Vargas Llosa made the analogy between the experience of the Latin American dictatorships and the political hegemony of the PRI, the largest political party in Mexico, which he called the perfect dictatorship. This dictatorship used the power and domination of media to ensure the continuity of a single political party (Vargas Llosa cited in El País, 1990).

The perfect dictatorship had apparently ended in 2000 with the arrival of a right-wing president, Vicente Fox. Fox became the first president not to come from the official party (PRI) but from the National Action Party (PAN). There was a lot of emotion with the arrival of Fox to the presidency, because it was a drastic and peaceful political change, which the country had never experienced. Because –as in other countries– the drastic political changes that the country had undergone had been carried out violently.

However, the emotion did not last long, because in general terms things remained the same. For some the Fox government was like an extension of any other PRI neoliberal government. Something that would be under discussion because in reality some very positive changes did occur, of course other things could not be fulfilled (Seguro Popular).

Fox was followed by Felipe Calderón, from the same party as Fox (National Action Party), who came to the presidency in highly controversial elections. Calderón won by a vote difference of 0.56% (230,000), less than 1%. He precisely beat Andrés Manuel López Obrador –current president– (At that time a left-wing candidate). The illusion that with the change from the PRI to the PAN things were going to improve for Mexico apparently was lost under Felipe Calderón. His mistake – from the perspective of some people – the declaration of War on Drugs.

Today his Secretary of Security is being prosecuted, here in New York, for his alleged links with the drug cartels.

The failure of the Mexican right allowed a young PRI candidate, Enrique Peña Nieto, to become president again in 2012. By the way, you have to know that Enrique Peña Nieto, being governor of the State of Mexico, inaugurated the Eighth Convention of the Media Ecology Association in 2007.

At first, everything was going well with Peña Nieto. In 2014 he was the cover of the international edition of Time Magazine. “Saving Mexico”, was the cover. However, various acts of corruption involving him, his family and his close associates quickly became known. In addition, the problem of drug trafficking and insecurity continued to be present.

The bad experience of Mexicans with previous governments of the center and right, allowed Andrés Manuel López Obrador to finally reach the presidency in 2018. He had run for leftist parties in the last two elections, and both times he had lost.

Now, although the approval rating of President López Obrador is positive, so far (61%); detractors are beginning to accumulate, after 4 years of government.

As you can see, democracy in Mexico has faced several challenges over the years. Currently, Mexico is still struggling to strengthen its democratic institutions and ensure citizen participation in political decision-making.

Third part

One of the main concerns at present is corruption. Corruption has been a persistent problem in Mexico, and has undermined citizens’ trust in their democratic institutions. Corruption has affected all levels of government, from local administration to the federal level, and has had a negative impact on the economy and society as a whole.

Another important concern is violence and insecurity. Mexico has faced an increase in violence related to organized crime in recent years, and this has affected the quality of life of many citizens. Violence and insecurity have been a barrier to citizen participation in politics and have undermined citizens’ trust in democratic institutions.

However, there are also signs of hope. Civil society in Mexico has been increasingly active in the fight against corruption and violence, and has demanded greater transparency and accountability from the government. In addition, the government has taken steps to strengthen democratic institutions, such as the 2014 electoral reform and the creation of an independent system for selecting judges.

In conclusion, democracy in Mexico faces important challenges at present, such as corruption and violence, but there are also signs of hope and an increasing commitment by civil society and the government to strengthen democratic institutions and ensure citizen participation in political decision-making.

As I mentioned before, with all this we can confirm that the democratic system in Mexico, is still a model under construction.

Fourth Part (what I didn’t say but I wrote)

At present, democratic systems have used the new media to remedy themselves. Now governments and the governed also use social media and artificial intelligence to propagate their ideas.

Social media and artificial intelligence have had a profound impact, introducing substantial benefits by allowing greater efficiency and effectiveness in the communication process, but at the same time generating considerable damage by perpetuating and amplifying bias and discrimination due to the content that flows through it. these new media.

Examples abound. About a year ago we published a text, a group of academics from the University of Berkeley and the Tecnologico de Monterrey under the name: “Harass, mislead, & polarize: An analysis of Twitter political bots’ tactics in targeting the immigration debate before the 2018 U.S. midterm election”. This article can be found in the journal Information Technology & Politics (Taylor, Francis).

This article investigates the interaction and messaging tactics of political Twitter bots before the 2018 U.S. midterm election. We analyzed the strategies of influential bots seeking to affect the immigration debate before the elections. Our findings reveal that the 10 most influential bots in our dataset all presented an anti-immigration viewpoint, and posted original tweets and retweets to give a false sense of authenticity about anti-immigration consensus. Bots’ messages relied heavily on negative emotional appeals by spreading harassing language and disinformation likely intended to evoke fear toward immigrants. Such accounts also employed polarizing language to entrench political group identity and provoke partisanship. Our findings help to understand the interaction and messaging tactics employed by political bots and suggest potential strategies that may be employed to counter their effectiveness.

Today millions of people check our accounts on social media, but we are not sure if what appears on our time line was written by a human or an intelligent system that hides a purpose, perhaps trying to influence our perception. For this reason, a better understanding of these new media is required.

The media ecology perspective is useful here because, as Neil Postman said: Media ecology looks into the matter of how media of communication -in this case new media– affect human perception, understanding, feeling, and value; and how our interaction with new media facilitates or impedes our chances of survival. It is an important instrument to help young people understand the uncertainty of an environment, and prepare them for change.

As our friend Lance State wrote: Media Ecology is the study of media environments, the idea that technology and techniques, modes of information and codes of communication play a leading role in human affairs. (Strate, 1999)

Today many people are talking about the famous ChatGPT, which is undoubtedly very interesting. Today it is in its introductory stage, in its infancy, would say Paul Levinson. Everyone is happy with the new toy.

In an advanced stage of the fourth Industrial Revolution, we could be surrounded by intelligent robots and machines capable of doing everything better than us

But the media ecologist knows that just as this technology introduces benefits it will also generate costs. What will those costs be? Because technology gives, but it also takes away.

The media ecologist also knows that this technology will benefit some but hurt others. Who will benefit and who will lose from this technology?

And we also know that there is a philosophy behind this technology. What will be the idea behind this technology?

In machine learning (Rouhianen, 2018), computers and their algorithms can learn from their experiences, even without being programmed for it. Machine learning enables users to offer increasingly personalized experiences. However, algorithms not only serve to improve processes. They are also capable of changing behaviors. (Yogeshwar, 2018). Machine learning established a watershed in the history of persuasion.

Automated accounts can play a valuable part in the social media ecosystem by answering questions about a variety of topics in real time or providing automated updates about news stories or events. At the same time, they can also be used to attempt to alter perceptions of political discourse on social media, spread misinformation, or manipulate online rating and review systems.

• 66% of all tweeted links to popular websites are shared by bots.
• A small number of bots are responsible for a significant share of links to prominent news and media sites.
• Automated accounts post a substantial share of links to a wide range of online media outlets on Twitter.
• Automated Twitter accounts post the vast majority of tweeted links to popular news and current events sites that do not offer original reporting.

We also recognize that the change is ecological, not additive, how will it mix with what we have? What can be derived from the impact of this technology? Remember that We shape our tools and then our tools shape us.

As Postman said: “When you plug something into a wall, someone is getting plugged into you. Which means you need new patterns of defense, perception, understanding, evaluation. You need a new kind of education.”(Postman, 1969) Teaching as a subversive activity,

Although the idea that technology cannot be good or bad in itself is deeply rooted in some critics of technological determinism, there are some other theorists who point out that its use is impossible without considering some kind of influence, judgment or bias. Precisely Jacques Ellul was one of these theorists who strongly rejected the idea of technological neutrality.

Regardless of how technology is used, it will always have a certain number of positive or negative consequences, noted Jaques Ellul (1990). Technological development cannot simply be described as positive, neither negative, nor neutral; but we will always be conditioned by our own systems and technological environments.

There are many risks associated with the design and implementation of AI systems. For example, algorithmic biases. “All non-trivial decisions are biased. There is a lack of understanding about the context of use, and there is no rigorous mapping of the decision criteria used by these systems, which also lack explicit justification for the chosen criteria” claims Ansgar Koene, researcher at the Horizon Digital Economy Research Institute of the University of Nottingham and founder of the UnBias project against the “often unintended and always unacceptable” algorithmic biases. (Paniaugua, 2019)

We have the right to know how AI is used, who uses it, for what purpose, in what context, what is the business model because algorithmic biases can have serious effects.

“A human being in perfection ought always to preserve a calm and peaceful mind, and never to allow passion or a transitory desire disturb his tranquility. I do not think that the pursuit of knowledge is an exception to this rule. If the study to which you apply yourself has a tendency to weaken your affections, and to destroy your taste for those simple pleasures in which no alloy can possibly mix, then that study is certainly unlawful, that is to say, not befitting the human mind. If this rule were always observed; if not man allowed any pursuit whatsoever to interfere with the tranquility of his domestic affections, Greece had not been enslaved; Caesar would have spared his country; America would have been discovered more gradually; and the empires of Mexico and Peru had not been destroyed.”

Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft, 1797-1851. (1998). Frankenstein, or, The modern Prometheus : the 1818 text. Oxford ; New York :Oxford University Press