FREE ESSAY ON MARK POSTER'S THE MODE OF INFORMATION

MARK POSTER'S THE MODE OF INFORMATION

ENGL444: BOOK CRITIQUE - Mark Poster's "The Mode of Information"
Maitiu Ward
Mark Poster's "The Mode of Information" can be seen as something of an attempt to
establish a new discourse in socio-political theory. He does this mainly through the
concerted criticism of several prominent philosophers, including Marx, Foucault, Derrida
and Baudrillard. Typically, his prime concern with the bulk of most of these
philosopher's works is their tendency towards totalization, or their failure to
adequately incorporate an understanding of what Poster sees as the "mode of information"
into their theorizing. From what remains of his counterparts' theories, Poster attempts
to assemble his new discourse, incorporating into the equation theories of globalization
and information. My concern in this critique will largely be to highlight some of
Poster's own theoretical inadequacies, and perhaps provide a very brief overview of the
core elements of his theory of information along the way. Of key interest will be his
belief that the current global era of late Capitalism can be defined by the shift from
the Marxist "mode of production" towards a "mode of information", as well as his
discussions around the concept of digitization. Other points of interest beyond these,
but nonetheless related to them, will focus upon Poster's belief in the decentering of
the subject through the forces of "new media", as well as his belief in the death of the
Marxist Proletariat as a definitive social force within modern Capitalism.
Absolutely vital to the body of Poster's book "The Mode of Information" is the assumption
that the human race has moved into a new social era, defined by the cultural logic of
Late Capitalism. Poster sees this era as being characterized by the globalized spread of
information, typically in the form of "new Media", via a complex and technologically
advanced web of communications networks. Poster also sees as central to Late Capitalism a
shift in primacy away from the mode of production towards the mode of consumption, and
ultimately the "mode of information". Poster essentially believes that the emphasis in
contemporary Capitalism no longer focuses upon how goods are produced, but rather how
they are sold ( or consumed, as the case may be ). Implicit in this belief ( and in fact
expatiated by his belief in the demise of the proletariat ) is the concept of a
"knowledge economy", whereby the proletariat of the early Industrial era have been
steadily replaced by mechanization and a new workforce comprised of technologically adept
skills people. The old exchange of capital for physical labor has supposedly been
outmoded by new developments in production technology, having been replaced by a new
exchange of capital for technological skill or intellectual ability. For a certain few
privileged nations, this could certainly well be the case. When contextualised globally,
however, this premise becomes highly questionable . The fact of the matter is that for
most of the world's population, technological advancement is precluded by poverty and the
simple fact that it is vastly unaffordable. In terms of the Proletariat, it could well be
argued, and in fact has been by World Systems Theorists, that rather than disappearing
with the advent of more efficient production methods ( such as computerization ), the
exchange of raw physical labor for capital has simply relocated itself away from the
wealthier nations ( often termed as the "core" nations ), to the poorer developing ones (
termed as the "periphery" ). Those nations not wealthy enough to be able to afford the
cost of technological advancement have simply become the home of this "new" world order's
Working Classes - the horrors and injustices which once characterized the West's early
Industrial era can now be readily discovered in any number of developing countries'
backyards.
To be fair to Poster, however, there is no denying the far-reaching impact of the new
communications media he focuses upon so much within "The Mode of Information". Although
the impacts of digitization are perhaps not so readily noticeable at the grassroots level
of the majority of the world's population, their effects have undeniably brought about
huge changes internationally. Equally, there is no denying the fact that the global
spread of communications media, not necessarily those related to digitization, has had a
considerable impact upon social structures around the world. But firstly, let us focus in
upon Poster's discussion of digitization.
Poster sees the digitization phenomena as a not inconsiderable force for social, economic
and political change. One of the core elements Poster attributes to the process is the
ability to transfer information almost instantly across vast distances of space, thereby
neutering the impact of spatial and temporal effects upon international transactions of
information and capital. Up until very recently these elements posed considerable hurdles
to the development of international relationships. On a purely economic level, this has
resulted in the rapid development of global capital, a situation where literally billions
of US dollars float between countries on a day-to-day basis. It has effectively opened up
the way for the rapid development of Globalization, allowing not only the globalization
of capital, but also the transnationalization of corporations to a never before seen
extent. What this has meant at a social level, is that culture ( particularly US/Western
culture ) has also become globalized. As cultures have become more sensitive to the
fluctuations and differences in their foreign counterparts, Poster believes individual
cultural identities have likewise become increasingly de-centered. Heightening this
de-centering effect, according to Poster, is digitization's impact upon meaning,
particularly in relation to text. One of the most obvious results of the digitization of
text has been the increased ability to not only spread texts rapidly across the globe,
but also to copy and modify those texts with a never before possible ease. Text has
essentially become much more fluid, much more easily adaptable and transferable, and much
more open-ended. In effect, much more like speech, or so it would seem Poster would have
us believe. But then, on the same note, Poster goes on to discuss digitization's closure
of meaning. This he believes is a potential result of the process of binary encoding, a
necessary feature of the digital process whereby information to be transferred into
digital format is converted into a series of one's and zeroes. The information, be it a
Shakespearean text or a music video, becomes signified by binary code in such a fashion
that it can only be re-rendered in one form and one form only ( as a Shakespearean text
or music video, say... ). It is for this reason that Poster believes digitization could
potentially reduce possible meanings- unlike text, which can be interpreted as yielding
an infinitude of meaning, Poster believes binary coding can yield only one meaning, the
one it was programmed to yield. I feel Poster's logic in this respect suffers somewhat.
Poster seems to ignore the fact that meaning is not produced solely through the vehicles
of language, be they either binary code or text. Its production is also facilitated
through the interpretation of that language. Even on the most basic grammatical level,
the textual term "spring" has several different meanings. Visually, however, it appears
to us as only one word, composed of five letters of varying shapes. If we were to show
that word to an individual with absolutely no knowledge of the English language it would
mean almost nothing. The text itself means nothing, it is only what we as the
reader/interpreter bring to the text that creates meaning. In the conversion of that text
into binary code, how does this impact upon our interpretation of it, once it is
converted back into its readily recognizable textual form? The answer of course would be
"very little"; until the reader's interpretation begins to become effected, no shift in
meaning will result from a conversion to binary code. 
If Poster's analysis of binary coding is questionable, what of his discussion upon the
de-centering effects of digitization, or more generally, new Media? His basic premise is
certainly sound - that the complex and sometimes contradictory messages sent through the
format of new Media around the globe have resulted in a de-centering of identity, and a
shift in cultural attitudes. For evidence of this, we need look no further than Japan, at
the strange emulsion of traditional Japanese cultural values with American consumer
culture. In fact, anywhere where capitalism and consumer culture exist, we can find
evidence of what could be seen as the de-centering of identity via the messages and
demands of new Media. The individual "freedom" which Poster believes a de-centering of
cultural identity via new Media entails raises some doubts questionable, however. Poster
believes that through this de-centering force, individuals gain "freedom" from
pre-conceived notions of their potential identity and place in the world. Thus the
"de-centering" of their previously ordained identity ( ordained in the sense in which it
is established for them by their society ) opens up the "freedom " of establishing for
themselves a new identity, or, even more importantly, the "freedom" of being
unconstrained by any identity at all. What Poster either fails to notice or fails to
mention, however, is how this force has manifest itself in contemporary Late Capitalist
societies, for instance Japan. It could be argued that typically, loss of a well-grounded
social identity via the effects of consumerism and new Media, can result in even further
recourse to the processes of consumer culture. Increasingly in recent years, advertising
( one form of new Media ) has played upon the desire for identity within consumer
cultures. It is commonplace for advertisers to sell their products not upon their merit
or usefulness, but through their association with a lifestyle or cultural identity. Thus
when you buy the product, you are buying it to associate yourself with an identity or
culture. An individual with an insecure perception of his or her personal identity would
make for an easy victim of this kind of advertising ploy, and might happily ( or
unhappily ) begin constructing for themselves an identity based around consumerism. In
this kind of situation, we could say that the establishment of identity no longer remains
the responsibility of traditional society, but has become, in a sense, "privatized",
increasingly belonging to the domain of advertisers and their financiers.
Another interesting angle Poster takes upon the concept of freedom in the contemporary
Late Capitalist age, is that it is further advanced through the effects of digitization
and the Internet. At the core of Poster's belief in the freedom enhancing properties of
these two forces is a perception that the "Panopticon" of social control has no influence
or presence within the domain of the Internet. Firstly, he believes the lack of any
socially restraining force has allowed a greater exploration of individual identity than
previously possible under the older social order of "everyday" society. Poster takes as
his evidence the example of the chat-room, where people are given almost total control
over what identities they wish to adopt. Poster himself, however, raises some doubts as
to the extent of the "freedom" the Internet allows for. He goes on to point out the
tendency for social constraints to follow internet participants through from external
society into the Internet chat-room, or if not into the chat-room, at least into that
participant's psyche post-chat. What I believe Poster is attempting to say here is that
despite the individual being given relative free-reign in the internet environ to create
for his or herself an identity of their choosing, it is the society outside the realm of
the internet which initially establishes for that individual their primary identity, and
it is quite possible that this identity will manifest itself in this individual's actions
whilst he or she is within the Internet, simply because of that identities primary
status. This may result from a feeling of guilt on the part of the individual who engages
in identity reconstruction whilst on the Internet, as their feigned persona's values
system conflicts with their "real" persona's socially ordained values system in "normal
life". And of course, who is to say that some individual's may find the concept of
identity reconstruction repugnant from the very outset? Certainly because some
individuals engage in it does not warrant the belief that all peoples will find
themselves so inclined upon encountering a chat-room. For many people, it is quite
conceivable that the internet will offer very little in the way of individual liberation
simply because their personal values system is so strongly against the process that they
will refuse to even participate in it. What Poster believes is the Internet's salvation,
in terms of its freedom enhancing properties, is the lack of direct intervention which
institutionalized social panopticons ( e.g. Governments ) actually maintain within the
world wide web. Through the Internet, Poster believes the opportunities for dissenting
voices to be heard, or at least voiced without fear of reprisals or silencing, are
enormous. To a point, I believe this to be a fair statement for Poster to have made a
decade ago, and even now. Of course, the benefit of hindsight allows the contemporary
reader knowledge of the exception to the rule. It is now well known that governments, or
more particularly the U.S. government's Central Intelligence Agency, actively sift the
e-mail traffic of the World Wide Web's participants looking for communications they
believe to be potentially dangerous. This could well be described as a prime example of
direct government involvement with Internet goings-on, if not a good example of an
external controlling social force within the World Wide Web. Hence, it would not be fair
for Poster to assert the exclusion of the Internet from the controlling mechanisms of the
social "Panopticon".
Of key interest will be his belief that the current global era of late Capitalism can be
defined by the shift from the Marxist mode of production towards a mode of information,
as well as his discussions around the concept of digitization. Other points of interest
beyond these, but nonetheless related to them, will focus upon Poster's belief in the
decentering of the subject through the forces of new media, as well as his belief in the
death of the Marxist Proletariat as a definitive social force within modern Capitalism.
Mark Poster's The Mode of Information can be seen as something of an attempt to establish
a new discourse in socio-political theory. He does this mainly through the concerted
criticism of several prominent philosophers, including Marx, Foucault, Derrida and
Baudrillard. Typically, his prime concern with the bulk of most of these philosopher's
works is their tendency towards totalization, or their failure to adequately incorporate
an understanding of what Poster sees as the mode of information into their theorizing. 
Poster's theorizing within "The Mode of Information", then, contains some seriously
flawed assumptions relating directly to the very core of his argument. The main problems
we strike in a reading of his book relate to the assumption that the human race has moved
into a new social era, defined by the cultural logic of Late Capitalism. Poster sees this
era as being characterized by the globalized spread of information, typically in the form
of new Media, via a complex and technologically advanced web of communications networks.
Poster also sees as central to Late Capitalism a shift in primacy away from the mode of
production towards the mode of consumption, and ultimately the mode of information. As we
have seen, the assumption that the human race is moving towards primacy of the "mode of
information" could be seen as dramatically incorrect, simply because the associated
demise of the Proletariat this necessitates under Poster's logic has not occurred. Even
if we were to accept his definition of the Proletariat as a workforce comprised of manual
laborers ( and not just any person working for less capital/reward than their work-input
produces ), a brief study of the socio-economic composition of any developing country
would reveal the very real presence of a global working-class. Combine this with Poster's
failure to adequately recognize the technologically debilitating problem of poverty most
of the world's peoples face, and we have a substantial oversight on the part of Poster's
book " The Mode of Information" and its theories. 
Bibliography
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Mark Poster, 1990, "The Mode of Information", Polity Press, Cambridge, 
Steve Hobden and Richard Wyn Jones, 1997, "World System Theory", as found in "The
Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations" , edited by
John Bayliss and Steve Smith, Oxford University Press, New York