But that year was a heady one, for both McLuhan and for a nation that would soon undergo profound cultural and political changes, panelists said on Oct. 13 at Fordham.

The University and New York City served as twin incubators for ​the Canadian philosopher and new media scholar’s always evolving theories, said McLuhan’s son, Eric. “It was a magical year,” he said. “Everything we predicted in ‘67 or ‘68 has come true.”

Global Interconnectedness

Eric McLuhan joined two of his father’s protégés—Fordham communication professors John Carey, Ph.D., and Paul Levinson, Ph.D.,—at the Lincoln Center campus for a look-back, on the 50th anniversary of McLuhan’s tenure at the University. He referenced his father’s conception of the global village, a term the elder McLuhan coined to denote the interconnectedness of people throughout the world via ever-evolving technology; i.e., what became known decades later as the World Wide Web.

That particular academic year, McLuhan and his team of collaborators—son Eric, University faculty member John Culkin, S.J., the painter Harley Parker, and the anthropologist Ted Carpenter—conducted seminars, showed films, and assigned independent projects to students that would echo and expand on McLuhan’s thinking. His ideas about technology and society were most conspicuously outlined in his aphoristic declaration that “the medium is the message.” For the students and their mentors, the semester amounted to a theater of experimentation, exploration, and prognostication.

Eric McLuhan suggested that his father’s prescience continues to resonate today, 37 years after his passing. It has never been more evident during an epoch when “fake news,” “media bubbles” and “social media” dominate the discourse, panelists agreed.

A Million Isolated Villages

Carey, who studied under McLuhan, recalled an instance when McLuhan said his theories were works in progress. “He said, ‘Don’t take everything I say as gospel. A lot of what I say I’m just testing the waters and I may disagree with myself a week later,’” Carey said.

He suggested that McLuhan would likely have revised his conception of the global village given the ubiquity of the internet, which McLuhan had foreseen some 30 years before its advent.

“He talked about the fact we were in a global village, that essentially we were all getting the same thing and that meant we were one village even though we were the world,” Carey said. “I think the Internet has totally shattered that. We’re not in a global village anymore. We’re in a million isolated villages of our own choosing. And I think he would observe that were he here.”

Inside Looking Out

Although McLuhan’s tenure in the media capital of the world was short, it shaped him profoundly, his son said. From his home base in Toronto, McLuhan was able to peer into the United States regularly and see his neighbors “more clearly than the people involved in it could see themselves.”

“Now he found himself on the inside looking out, and he learned a lot,” he said.

Levinson, the author of Digital McLuhan and McLuhan in an Age of Social Media (the latter first published in 1999), said McLuhan was always probing. He was a person who declined to make value judgments, preferring instead to keep exploring.

During a Q and A, Levinson was unequivocal in response to a questioner asking who, today, has inherited McLuhan’s mantle as a far-sighted inquisitor.

“It’s ipso facto impossible for there to be another McLuhan,” Levinson said.

–Richard Khavkine

Most professors didn’t choose academia to become media stars. But personality-driven new media is here to stay, and many academics are nervously sailing into uncharted waters.

As a professor of communication and media management in the Schools of Business, John Carey, Ph.D., FCRH ’68, isn’t concerned for the profession, as he has studied similar changes for decades.

Whether it’s politicians dealing with their televised images in the 1960s, or television networks dealing with a multitude of platform choices in the 2010s, Carey’s fascination with media theory has adapted with the times, with a particular focus on behavior as it relates to new technology. Much material is analyzed in When Media Are New: Understanding the Dynamics of New Media Adoption and Use (University of Michigan, 2010), which he coauthored with Martin C.J. Elton.

After studying at Fordham with renowned media theorist Marshall McLuhan, Carey went to the University of Pennsylvania’s Annenberg School for Communication, where he wrote his dissertation on political candidates’ behavior on and off camera.

He interviewed the media staff from both the Kennedy and Nixon campaigns about the nation’s first televised presidential debate in 1960. He learned that neither Kennedy nor Nixon wanted to be seen by the press walking into the makeup room before the debate. They feared an emasculating headline like: “Kennedy/Nixon wears makeup.”

But Kennedy’s media camp understood the effects of harsh TV lights. They purchased makeup at a local drugstore and applied it to their candidate in private.

“Kennedy was no better than Nixon in understanding television,” said Carey, who suggested Kennedy owed his successful appearance to his handlers. “Politicians, then as now, are not as savvy with media as people think.”

Carey went on to study the convergence of broadcast television and telecommunications via an interactive television system that linked five senior citizen centers by two-way cable. What was initially funded as a way for the seniors to share information on social security and nutrition, via a local cable channel, became a space for seniors to meet and have fun.

One particularly popular segment featured Mary, a former recluse at the center who presented weekly bargains found at local supermarkets. Her cable segment was simple: she clipped sales news from the newspaper and then read it to the cable audience. In her own low-tech way, Mary had “gone viral” and become a local celebrity, said Carey.

“The low production quality of the show actually was very human, and that’s what made it so popular,” he said. “This was social media before it was called social media.”

Most recently, Carey completed a study for NBC that focused on the use of second and third screens by television viewers during the 2012 London Olympics. He found that, counter to what some network executives had feared, smartphones and tablets did not detract from TV viewership; rather, they whetted viewers’ appetites to watch the events later on television.

Whether they be politicians, doctors, senior citizens, or consumers, people altered their behavior alongside of evolving technology, Carey’s research has shown. Clearly, changes are coming to academia too.

“There is no question that online classes will become more prevalent,” said Carey. Whether the future of academia will focus on personality-driven lectures for Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs) or simply enhanced interaction on Blackboard, is fodder for debate.

Carey doubts professors will need to develop on-screen personalities, but their presentations will matter more, as will their ability to interact online. While he does not recommend an all-out plunge into the Twittersphere, he does believe that faculty should embrace the changes at least incrementally.

He suggested media newcomers begin by holding more group discussions on Blackboard. He also urged incorporating Skype and YouTube into lectures.

“That guest lecturer who you’d like to invite up to the Bronx but are reluctant because you might be imposing on their schedule, they can now can do it from their office via Skype and it’ll take no more than 20-30 minutes of their time,” he said. “You’re the expert, but now you can bring in other experts.”

Academics who believe the academy’s on-campus enrollment will drop with online delivery platforms may also be mistaken, Carey said, just as NBC executives were mistaken about TV viewership and new platforms.

“There are definite advantages to face-to-face. I don’t think universities or classrooms are going to go away,” he said. “But the mix is going to change. I don’t want to assign a number—whether it will be 10, 20, or 40 percent—but there will be a higher percentage of courses offered online.”