Since the publication of Amusing Ourselves to Death in 1985, the internet has become one of the dominant media of the world. Using Neil Postman’s argument that each medium has a bias that shapes information, describe what you see as the internet’s influence on public discourse and society. Is the internet better or worse than television? How are they similar and how are they different?

Postman implies that the Age of Typography represented the apex of history in terms of serious public discourse because of print’s dominance. Thus, if there’s no going back to it, it stands to reason that our public discourse will never be as high in quality as in the past. Do you think this is true? Why or why not?

Do you agree with Postman that information was made irrelevant, impotent, and incoherent (65) when telegraphy introduced news from around the world at an ever faster pace? He argues that before this introduction, news was local and pertinent to people’s lives—but is it not instructive to hear of events in other countries? Could this not broaden people’s horizons or instill empathy?