Draft:Enzensberger's theory of mass media

Enzensberger's theory of mass media is a socialist media theory by Hans Magnus Enzensberger. It builds on the criticism of the culture industry from the Frankfurt School, but at the same time stands in the emancipatory tradition of Bertolt Brecht's radio theory. The theory was first published in the magazine Kursbuch in 1970.

Key statements

The starting point is that of Horkheimer and Adorno in the Dialectic of Enlightenment (1947), where they formulated criticism of the modern "culture industry". Enzensberger continues this criticism with his critique of the "consciousness industry": "With the development of electronic media, the consciousness industry has become the pacemaker of the socio-economic development of late-industrial societies."

Enzensberger's understanding of the consciousness industry is dialectical. He sees in it both limiting and liberating elements. On the one hand, electronic media in modern society is taking on more and more “management and control functions”, on the other hand their technical structure is breaking through previous limitations. The enlargement of communication content as well as the variety of communication channels undermine the possibilities of censorship. Since electronic media make information freely reproducible and generally accessible, they also break through social barriers: "The structure of the new media is egalitarian." (Kursbuch 20/1970: 167)

The abolition of the separation between consumers and producers is of central importance for Enzensberger's media theory. Referring to Bertolt Brecht's Radio Theory, Enzensberger formulates: “Electronic technology knows no fundamental opposition between sender and receiver.” In the “repressive use of media” there is a centrally controlled program with one sender and many receivers, the consumers are passivated and depoliticized:

In their present form, media such as television or film are therefore not used for communication, but rather to prevent communication. They do not allow any interaction between sender and receiver: technically speaking, they reduce the feedback to the theoretical minimum.

— Kursbuch 20/1970: 160

An “emancipatory use of media”, on the other hand, turns every receiver into a sender. This is where Enzensberger's critique of the previous media understanding of the left comes in, which sees cinema, radio and television primarily as an instrument of manipulation that is used against the Proletariat was addressed. This goes hand in hand with sticking to book and magazine, i.e. a “media situation that roughly corresponds to the situation in 1900”: “The manipulation thesis of the left is defensive at its core, in its effects it can lead to defeatism.” (Kursbuch 20/1970: 163) Enzensberger does not see media devices as pure means of consumption: "In principle, they are always means of production at the same time, and since they are in the hands of the masses, they are socialized means of production." (Kursbuch 20/1970: 168)

Similar to Brecht, however, Enzensberger restricts himself to say that the mass media in capitalism does not develop its full potential: “Only a free socialist society will be able to make them productive. “Nevertheless, there is no reason for the left in the existing form of society to do without the media possibilities that are already available to create a new public sphere: “Today, tape recorders, picture and film cameras are already largely owned by wage earners. The question arises as to why these means of production do not appear en masse [...] in all social conflict situations.” (Kursbuch 20/1970: 170) Enzensberger calls for both “aggressive” and conscious access to new forms of media:

Unmanipulated letters, films and broadcasting do not exist. The question is therefore not whether the media is being manipulated or not, but who is manipulating it. A revolutionary design doesn’t need to make the manipulators disappear; on the contrary, it has to make everyone a manipulator.

— Kursbuch 20/1970: 166

The political activists should not only take over the media, but also organizational forms of the metropolitan subcultures, e.g. B. “network-like communication models built on the principle of interaction: a mass newspaper written and distributed by its readers, a video network of politically active groups, etc.” (Kursbuch 20/1970: 170) It is not for nothing that the network idea is reminiscent of the organizational structure of the Internet. The so-called "network of networks" has eliminated the sharp separation between sender and receiver from the start. For Enzensberger, the abolition of this separation is the general condition of the modern media world. The network idea, on the other hand, had a much more specific function in the early 1970s. It is necessary to overcome a structural problem of socialist movements: the "dialectics of discipline and spontaneity, centralism and decentralization, authoritarian leadership and anti-authoritarian disintegration" (Kursbuch 20/ 1970: 170).

In Spiegel 2/2000, Enzensberger was critical of his theoretical considerations he expressed in 1970:

Well said at a time when there was no talk of the Internet. But the author's attempt to overtake media practice led to all sorts of expectations that seem naïve today. In contrast to the old media, utopian possibilities were ascribed to the imaginary network of the future; its emancipatory potency was beyond question for the poet. In keeping with Marxist theory, he had unlimited faith in the famous 'unfolding of the productive forces', a materialistic variant of the Christian triad of faith, love and hope. Today only the evangelists of digital capitalism would swear by such promises. Maybe 30 years later a certain level of soberness is advisable.

— Spiegel 2/2000

Literature

• Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Baukasten zu einer Theorie der Medien. In: Kursbuch 20, pp. 159-186, 1970

Sources

Category:Media studies