McLuhan Meets Convergence Culture: Towards a New Multimodal Discourse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing principally on public performances in lectures, interviews, and staged presentations, rather than on published texts, this paper discusses McLuhan’s still overlooked contribution to media studies, including a conceptualization of multimodality that defies the logics of literacy, and refutes and refuses its barriers and boundaries. Seen here as a road not taken, McLuhan’s understanding of media, in the form of a transitional theory of media convergence, was an opportunity lost to understand, and to intentionally cultivate, our experience of multimodality, not as a media multiplication, addition, or enhancement, but with the proto-acoustic ‘all-at-once-ness’ of multisensorial convergence. The cost of that lost opportunity for media studies, we argue, has been a conception of multimodality in particular, and media convergence in general, as a ‘multiplication’ driven principally by the characters, capabilities, and economies of digital technologies, not the still vastly untapped sensory and cognitive capabilities of human beings.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.028 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".