Supervisor’s assessment, by Dr. Angus Carlyle

Michael Burgess: Internetism: The Print Culture’s Conceptions of the Internet

Presentation:

Despite some (very) occasional confusing sections (e.g. p. 16 (1)), the rare typo, the occasional unclosed quotation marks, this is a confident, controlled dissertation indicating a student well in command of academic and argumentative protocols.

Structure:

The provocative Introduction works well to establish the research project. Despite some slightly underdeveloped linking (e.g. p. 12-13), the occasional resort to catalogueing information with little analysis (primarily the internet section) and the lack of conventional chapters, the organisation of material facilitates comprehension and minimises repetition. One criticism might be that given the pun that is the source of the title, and the relative unfamiliarity of Said’s ideas, perhaps more space could have been devoted to a discussion of Orientalism – although despite its brevity what appears is accurate and instructive.

Content:

The writer manages to extract considerably more from the McLuhan / Internet connection than many similar (published) endeavours, not least because of the attempt to justify the model (p. 4 (2)), efforts made to defuse the potentially explosive criticisms of McLuhan, to offer some criticisms of his own (p. 9-10) and to flesh out the account with examples. The use of Chomsky as a corrective to McLuhan’s perceived acquiescence in the identified tendencies of media development works well, as does the extension of the filter model to the Internet.

Overall:

Although I remain unconvinced about the Internet escaping the criticisms of the filter model (especially re: advertisers alleged inability to control content), this is a very strong piece of well-researched, well argued work around a well-chosen and originially approached subject.

Mark: 85%

Second Marker’s remarks by Anthony Delano

Fully concur.

Second marker’s mark: 85%

Finally moderated mark: 90%