Baudrillard on The Ecstasy of Communication

Jean Baudrillard’s concept of “the ecstasy of communication” describes a world where everything is transparent, exposed, and inescapably connected through media, technology, and information networks. Unlike older models of communication, where meaning was shaped by depth, secrecy, or symbolic exchange, Baudrillard argues that in the late 20th century, society has entered a state of total exposure, where nothing is hidden, and everything is visible. This, he suggests, has profound consequences for individual identity, privacy, and meaning itself.

From Depth to Surface: The Collapse of Distance

In traditional societies, communication was structured by clear boundaries—between private and public, real and represented, hidden and revealed. The individual had an interior life, a sense of self that was partly defined by what remained unsaid, unseen, or unknowable to others. There was a symbolic exchange in communication: meaning was something that developed through relationships, secrets, and interpretation.

In the modern world, however, these distinctions collapse. With the rise of mass media, surveillance, social networks, and digital culture, there is no more interiority—everything is immediately displayed, circulated, and exposed. The individual no longer has a private sphere because they are constantly connected, constantly “on,” constantly visible.

Baudrillard describes this as the ecstasy of communication—not ecstasy in the traditional sense of pleasure, but in the sense of being overwhelmed, overstimulated, and trapped in a hyper-connected, overexposed state. We are no longer subjects who communicate meaningfully; we are nodes in an endless circuit of information, transmitting and receiving signals at all times.

The Body and the Screen: The Loss of Subjectivity

This transformation is especially evident in the way technology shapes our relationship with the body and the self. In a world dominated by screens, social media, and digital interfaces, individuals no longer experience their own bodies as private spaces but as public, hyper-visible objects. The body becomes a screen, constantly performing, constantly displayed, constantly circulating as an image.

For Baudrillard, this leads to a new kind of alienation—not the alienation of repression (as in Marxist thought) but the alienation of overexposure. The problem is not that we are prevented from speaking, but that we are forced to speak, to be visible, to perform ourselves in public at all times.

The End of Meaning?

In this state of total transparency, meaning becomes unstable. When everything is exposed, nothing carries depth. When everything is available, nothing is truly valuable. In an age of hypercommunication, we are drowning in information but starving for meaning. This, Baudrillard suggests, is the paradox of our time: we communicate more than ever, yet meaning dissolves in the flood of signs and images.

More by Jean Baudrillard

The System of Objects

The Gulf War Did Not Taken Place

Baudrillard on "Consumer Society"

The Mirror of Production

The Frankfurt School and Mass Media Theory

The Frankfurt School, a group of scholars associated with the Institute for Social Research in Frankfurt, Germany, emerged in the early 20th century. Their objective was to understand the role of culture and communication in perpetuating and challenging the structures of capitalist societies. One of their main areas of critique was mass media, which provided valuable insights into the workings of modern communication. These insights remain relevant today, perhaps even more so.

1. Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer: The Culture Industry

The most notable contribution of the Frankfurt School to the critique of mass media was the concept of the "culture industry", as argued by Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer in their influential work "Dialectic of Enlightenment". They contended that mass-produced culture functioned as an industry, resulting in standardization of cultural goods, such as films, music, and news. This standardization led to a loss of individuality and creativity, promoting passive consumption over critical engagement and pacifying potential resistance against societal injustices.

2. Herbert Marcuse: One-Dimensional Man

Herbert Marcuse, in his work "One-Dimensional Man", provided a critique of modern industrial societies where advanced capitalism and mass media contribute to a conformist and non-critical populace. Marcuse argued that mass media played a significant role in eliminating dissent and integrating individuals into the established order, making alternative ways of thinking and living almost unthinkable. He further posited that media technologies were instruments of social control, facilitating a one-dimensional thought process that favored the status quo.

3. Walter Benjamin: The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction

Walter Benjamin's influential essay, "The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction", focused on the diminishing "aura" or unique presence of an artwork in the age of mass reproduction. Benjamin acknowledged the potential democratization of art through mechanical reproduction but expressed concerns about its commodification, leading to the alienation of art from its original context and meaning. He also believed that film, as a mass medium, had the power to shape the perceptions of the masses, playing a revolutionary role. However, Benjamin recognized the potential co-option of this power by dominant ideologies.

4. Jürgen Habermas: The Public Sphere

Jürgen Habermas, although a second-generation member of the Frankfurt School, made an integral contribution to understanding the role of mass media through his concept of the "public sphere." Initially, Habermas posited an idealized 18th-century bourgeois public sphere where citizens engaged in rational-critical debates. However, with the rise of commercial mass media, Habermas argued that the public sphere underwent a transformation into a domain of passive consumption. Media became instruments of state or economic interests rather than facilitators of genuine public discourse.

See also: Adorno, the Culture Industry and Art as Resistance

Baudrillard's Hyperreality theory and Social Media

French sociologist and philosopher Jean Baudrillard is renowned for his theories on simulation and hyperreality, concepts that hold significant relevance in our digital age dominated by media. In particular, social media platforms exemplify Baudrillard's notion of hyperreality with their curated images, viral memes, and virtual interactions. Lets see how Baudrillard's theory applies to today's social media. 

At its core, Baudrillard's concept of hyperreality revolves around the blurring of the line between reality and a simulation of reality. In the postmodern age, societies have replaced reality and meaning with symbols and signs. These symbols, over time, become more real than the reality they represent, resulting in a state of hyperreality.

Social Media as a Hyperreality

Social media platforms like Instagram and Facebook provide an ideal environment for hyperreality to thrive. Here are some key aspects:

Curated Lives: The images and stories shared on social media are often carefully curated, filtered, and staged. As time passes, the online representation of an individual's life can become "more real" than their offline existence. The virtual image becomes the accepted reality.

Echo Chambers: Algorithms on social media ensure that users are presented with content they agree with or are inclined to enjoy. This creates an environment where one's beliefs are continuously reinforced, limiting exposure to alternative views or truths. As a result, a simulated version of reality is formed.

Virtual Interactions: Online engagements such as likes, shares, or comments can hold significant weight and influence. In some cases, these virtual interactions can feel more meaningful than real-life interactions. This emphasis on virtual validation can contribute to a hyperreal state where online affirmations carry more weight than real-world acknowledgments.

In the realm of social media, memes can exemplify hyperreality. Starting as representations of cultural ideas or sentiments, memes can evolve, detach from their original context, and take on a life of their own through virality and repetition.

Implications for Identity

In a hyperreal world driven by social media, two key implications for identity emerge:

Fluidity of Self: Social media allows users to present multiple versions of themselves, often idealized. Over time, these virtual selves can feel as real, if not more so, than their offline persona.

Validation and Existence: There is an increasing reliance on online validation to affirm one's worth and existence. The saying, "Pics or it didn't happen," epitomizes this hyperreal mindset.

Navigating Truth in a Hyperreal Age

The proliferation of deepfakes, filter bubbles, and biased algorithms raises questions about the nature of truth, further complicating the hyperreality of social media:

Deepfakes and Reality: Technological advancements make it increasingly challenging to distinguish between genuine content and AI-generated simulations, pushing us further into hyperreality.

Overcoming the Simulacrum: Baudrillard categorized images into four categories, with the final being the simulacrum — a copy without an original. In the age of social media, it becomes crucial to discern the simulacrum and seek the original to maintain a critical perspective.

See also: Baudrillard on "Consumer Society"

From Aura to Screenshot: Benjamin, Baudrillard, and the New Relic of the Digital Age

Culture Industry and Social Media

In 1944, Theodor Adorno and Max Horkheimer introduced the concept of the 'culture industry' in their seminal work, "Dialectic of Enlightenment". They argued that in advanced capitalist societies, culture is produced and disseminated on an industrial scale, leading to standardization and homogenization. Fast forward to today, and the world is in the grip of social media, a force arguably more influential and pervasive than any other medium. This begs the question: How does the concept of the culture industry intersect with the world of social media?

1. Homogenization and Standardization

Adorno and Horkheimer's main contention was that the culture industry promotes standardization and homogenization. Interestingly, social media platforms like Instagram, TikTok, and Facebook amplify this effect. Through their algorithmic feeds, these platforms curate content that appeals to users' existing preferences and beliefs, resulting in a homogenized feed where diverse or dissenting voices are often excluded. Moreover, the nature of viral content means that once a particular style, meme, or trend gains traction, it can quickly spread across platforms, creating a standardized cultural product.

2. Commodification of Culture

Another defining feature of the culture industry, as identified by Adorno and Horkheimer, is the commodification of cultural goods. Social media has taken this commodification to unprecedented heights. With the rise of influencer culture, individuals have transformed themselves into brands, monetizing their lives, experiences, and recommendations through sponsorships, partnerships, and affiliate marketing. Furthermore, the emergence of digital art and non-fungible tokens (NFTs) has blurred the line between culture and commerce, as artistic expressions are now being tokenized and traded as commodities.

3. Passive Consumption

The culture industry was notorious for encouraging passive consumption rather than active engagement. Interestingly, social media, despite its interactive facade, often falls into a similar pattern. The endless scroll feature of social media platforms encourages passive consumption of content, with users frequently engaging superficially by liking or sharing without delving deeper. Additionally, algorithmically-curated feeds can create echo chambers, exposing users only to content and views that align with their pre-existing beliefs, thereby discouraging active engagement and critical thinking.

4. The Erosion of Authenticity

Adorno and Horkheimer argued that the culture industry eroded genuine creativity and authenticity. In a similar vein, the world of social media grapples with authenticity issues. The pressure to present a perfect life on social media often leads users to curate and filter their realities, emphasizing highlights and concealing challenges. Moreover, the desire to go viral or gain followers can result in a replication of popular content rather than authentic creativity, leading to a copycat culture.

5. Democratization vs. Centralization

It can be argued that social media democratizes cultural production by allowing anyone to become a creator. However, this democratization is not without complications. While many individuals can produce content, the platforms themselves determine visibility through algorithms, leading to centralized control over what becomes popular or visible. Additionally, success on social media often requires resources such as high-quality equipment or advertising budgets, putting genuine grassroots content at a disadvantage and highlighting barriers to entry.

See also: Culture Industry Explained Simply

From Culture Industry to Culture Data: The Economics of Aesthetic Control

Gaze Theory Explained Simply

At its most fundamental level, gaze theory interrogates the ways in which viewers engage with visual narratives, and how these narratives, in turn, position the viewer. But delve a bit deeper, and it becomes clear that the gaze is not just a matter of seeing and being seen—it's a powerful dynamic that reveals intricate webs of power, gender, and identity.

The gaze, as explored in media and cultural studies, is not merely an act of seeing. It is an intricate dance of power, perception, and representation. Originating from film theory but subsequently adopted and adapted across various disciplines, the gaze encompasses a multitude of perspectives: from the male gaze that objectifies female subjects in cinema, to the colonial gaze that portrays colonized people in a specific light. It's about who holds the power to look and how those being looked at are represented and understood.

Gaze Theorists

Historically rooted in psychoanalysis, the idea of the gaze emerged as a cornerstone in film theory, though its ramifications extend across various disciplines. Its evolution is closely linked to several prominent figures:

• Jacques Lacan: A French psychoanalyst, Lacan is often credited with laying the groundwork for gaze theory. He introduced the concept of the "mirror stage," where an infant recognizes itself in a mirror, marking the commencement of the individual's relationship with their own image. For Lacan, the gaze wasn't just about looking; it was about the anxiety produced in being looked at, highlighting the asymmetrical power dynamics inherent in viewing.

• Laura Mulvey: Building on Lacanian thought, British feminist film theorist Laura Mulvey coined the term "male gaze" in the context of cinema. In her seminal "Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema" she argued that mainstream films are constructed with male viewers in mind, leading to the objectification of women. Her insights brought gender dynamics to the forefront of gaze theory, showcasing how the act of looking can be entrenched in patriarchal structures. 

• Edward Said: While not directly associated with gaze theory in the same way as Lacan or Mulvey, Said's work on "Orientalism" introduced the idea of a "colonial gaze". He described how the West views the East through a lens colored by preconceptions and stereotypes, which in turn, reinforces Western dominance and Eastern subjugation.

• Bell Hooks: Renowned for her contributions to gender and race discussions, hooks expanded the discourse around the gaze to consider intersections of race, class, and gender. She critiqued the "oppositional gaze" of Black viewers in Western cinema, discussing how Black audiences recognize and resist the racist structures in which they're portrayed.

• John Berger: Berger, a British art critic and novelist, brought a fresh perspective on gaze theory in his groundbreaking work "Ways of Seeing". This 1972 series, later adapted into a book, demystified the act of seeing, arguing that what we see is invariably influenced by a host of variables including tradition, culture, and the viewer's own individual bias. One of Berger's most salient points centered on the portrayal of women in art and advertising. He posited that women were historically depicted as objects of the male gaze, conditioned to see and be seen as objects to be appreciated, judged, or desired. By doing so, Berger underscored the entrenched gender dynamics in visual representation, asserting that women are often presented not as they are, but as they are expected to be in the eyes of male beholders. His elucidations on gaze theory emphasized the societal constructs that shape our perceptions, bridging the gap between historical art representations and contemporary visual culture.

The Seduction of Images: Baudrillard and Media Culture

In an era marked by the relentless flood of images and the omnipresence of media, the insights of French philosopher Jean Baudrillard seem prophetic. Baudrillard explored the seductive power of images in media and advertising, providing a critical lens through which we can dissect the interplay between representation, reality, and desire. 

The Proliferation of Signs: Baudrillard's Perspective

Baudrillard's examination of images begins with the notion of simulation, a process where reality is replaced by signs and symbols that create their own meanings. He argues that modern society is inundated by images that no longer refer to a real-world referent but generate meaning through their sheer proliferation. In this context, images become seductive precisely because they do not correspond to a tangible reality; they offer an enticing world of possibilities rather than a reflection of the actual.

Hyperreality and the Death of the Real

Central to Baudrillard's thought is the concept of hyperreality, where the distinction between the real and the simulated becomes blurred. In a hyperreal world, images do not merely represent reality; they become reality. This transformation resonates with the proliferation of digitally altered images and filtered photographs in contemporary social media platforms, where users curate their own hyperreal identities, creating an ever-expanding web of simulations.

The Seduction of the Signifier: Media and Advertising

Baudrillard contends that in a media-saturated environment, images operate as seductive signifiers detached from their original referents. Advertising and media culture leverage this seduction, using images to evoke desires and emotions disconnected from any direct product or reality. In this way, media and advertising cultivate a realm of symbolic desires, where products are secondary to the emotions and aspirations they evoke.

Contemporary Social Media and Visual Culture

The rise of social media amplifies and extends Baudrillard's insights into new dimensions. Platforms like Instagram and TikTok are founded on the creation and dissemination of images, fostering a digital realm where personal identity is constructed through curated images rather than authentic experiences. Social media thrives on the seduction of self-presentation, enabling users to construct hyperreal personas that can blur the line between the genuine and the fabricated.

The Self as Spectacle: Baudrillard in the Age of Selfies

Baudrillard's ideas become particularly pertinent when considering the phenomenon of selfies. The act of capturing and sharing selfies exemplifies the seductive power of images, as individuals are drawn into crafting and curating their appearances for public consumption. The selfie becomes a digital artifact of hyperreality, a simulacrum of the self that is constructed, manipulated, and shared.

Baudrillard's Echoes in the Image-Saturated Era

Baudrillard's examination of the seduction of images serves as a prescient guide for navigating the complex terrain of contemporary media culture. The realm of hyperreality, where images ceaselessly circulate and meaning is generated through their repetition, offers a profound commentary on our engagement with the digital world. As we increasingly find ourselves ensnared in a web of images that allure and entice, Baudrillard's insights remind us to critically reflect on the boundary between reality and its simulated representations. In an era where the line between truth and illusion is increasingly elusive, Baudrillard's philosophy urges us to decode the seductive appeal of images and question the realities they construct.

The Disappearance of Childhood Explained (short summary)

The Disappearance of Childhood is a theory introduced by Niel Postman that holds that the modern media has a crucial impact on a change in family life patterns. Generational differences blur: childhood, adulthood, and old age become loose categories. Childhood becomes an integral part of a world of knowledge and images, which adults also share. The adults, for their part, "refuse to grow old"; They are objects of eternal youth and work hard to achieve them.

Throughout his life, the individual, through various social agents (parents, school, etc.), acquires beliefs, opinions and behaviors that make him part of society and help him to function within it successfully. In this process, the media has a special place, for two reasons: (a) Unlike traditional social media agents, the mass media accompanies the individual throughout his life; (B) The media systematically appropriate for themselves roles previously played by human agents.

According to Postman exposure to television is not conditional on any prior knowledge, does not require deep thought and does not select the audience watching it . Children, who used to be a distinct group from the adults, are now exposed to the media, which reveals to them prematurely the secrets of the adult world; Thus childhood has lost its distinctiveness in today's technological world. Examples of this are soap operas and telenovelas. These genres present a simplistic emotional world, detached from the socio-political realities. The nature of the television medium, which encourages unbridled consumption and instant gratification and competes for the attention of the young consumer, leads to the neglect of important values ​​such as complexity, heterogeneity, social involvement and political 

 

Zizi Papacharissi / The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere – summary and review

According to Zizi Papacharissi in "The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere" web technology has the capacity for reestablishing the public sphere, giving the global public the possibility of freely and equally debate various issues. The problem that Papacharissi points to is the instead of promoting a new and equal behavioral patterns, it seems that the global capitalistic trend is still highly influential with the internet following it. For Papacharissi, the conditions for the constitution of a public sphere do not depend only on technology, but also on its users and owners.  

In did today's technology allows more people to engage in politics but this is still not sufficient, in Papacharissi's view, the reestablish the public sphere. At its beginning the internet seemed to hold a utopian promise of democracy. But Papacharissi says celebration were too early.

"The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere" tries to find out how political use of the internet will affect the public sphere. Papacharissi thinks that the internet promotes debate, which sustains a public sphere which in turn supports democracy. What Papacharissi is interested in is how internet discourse contributing to democracy.

For Papacharissi, there was never really a true public sphere in the sense that Jürgen Habermas described. Be it the Greek agora of the bourgeois public sphere, they were always exclusive rather than inclusive. What Papacharissi is asking now is whether the internet is capable of creating the long dreamt of public sphere that never existed. The other option is that the internet will become just another sphere which is controlled by capitalists (Papacharissi leans towards the second option).

According to Papacharissi, access to information in the internet remained unequal and even favors apathy. The exponential growth of the internet and content in it makes it hard for single, especially weak, voices to be heard. The ability to be anonymous allows the individual to say more, but his words mean less.

Papacharissi also holds that the internet is not really a public sphere. It was established by capitalism and for capitalism. The real interesting question that Papacharissi asks in " The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere" is weather to new public sphere of the internet be translated into material political action, and will people give up on the anonymity and expose themselves in the public sphere.  

See also:

Habermas' / The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society - summary

The Public Sphere as a Feed: Habermas, Adorno, and the Managed Life of Opinion

Habermas' / The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society - summary

  Habermas' / The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society - summary

Jürgen Habermas' The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society is without a doubt on of the most important and constituting books in media studies.

In The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society Haberams articulates his famous notion of the public sphere. According to Habermas the 18^th and 19^th centuries saw the beginning of a new type of bourgeois public sphere that subsequently declined in the 20^th century. Habermas explains the development of the public sphere from the monarchical and feudal forms it formerly took that were organized around symbolic representations of power and status. The liberal or bourgeois public sphere appeared when constitutional principles separated the private from the public domain. The bourgeois public sphere developed within the private sphere and gave rise to the democratically significant public opinion. The avant-garde of the bourgeois public sphere according to Habermas was intellectual activities in coffee-houses and salons that saw the inception of a critical attitude towards society. This type of public sphere grew in parallel to early capitalism and liberalism.

The second part of The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society relates to the transition from the bourgeois public sphere to modern mass society. Consumer capitalism began to invade the public sphere in the 20^th century, blurring the separation between the private and the public, the state and civil society. The bourgeois public sphere underwent transformation in a dialectic machnism.

Habermas' The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society was later on criticized for supposing equal and open access to the public sphere which was in reality exclusive and reserved only for white bourgeois males. In order to take part in the public sphere one had to have education and property, leaving in fact the majority of the population outside the bounds of the public sphere.  

  Habermas' / The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society - summary

Check Out (supports us and doesn't cost you any more)

  

Jürgen Habermas's Public Sphere explained (summary)

Jürgen Habermas's concept of the public sphere is a realm within social life in which public opinion can be formed and which is accessible to all. The engagement within the public sphere according to Habermas is blind to class positions and the connections between activists in the public sphere are formed through a mutual will to take part in matters that have a general interest. The public sphere, according to Habermas, is a product of democracy.

For Jürgen Habermas, the concept of "public opinion" is the control and criticism of organized political authority which is officially manifested by the public come elections.

Habermas examines the history of the public sphere and hold that in medieval times there existed no separation or distinction between the private and public sphere, due to the class pyramid of the feudal system. This system for Habermas positioned greater power at every level and to this day conventions regarding the ruler persisted, with political authority retained by the highest levels. Rulers saw themselves as the state and not as representatives of the state – meaning that they represent their power to the people and not for the people.    

According to Habermas, by the late 18^th century feudal institutions were finally disappearing along with the church's rule, making way to public power which was given autonomy. Rulers become public entities and professionalism bore the first signs of the rule of the bourgeois which became autonomous in relation to the government. Representational publicity was pushed over by a public force that formed around national and territorial sentiments and individual struggling with public power found themselves outside its collective power. The term "public" did not refer to the representation of a man with authority, but rather became the legitimate power of exercising power. The public sphere, according to Habermas, was the final stage of these developments.

Habermas sees the liberal model of the public sphere as something which is unprecedented in history. Different state constitutions contain clauses specifying the liberal model of the public sphere – private people joining together to form a public and thus mediate the relationship between the state and the bourgeois society in order to supervise over and educate the political government. In the second half of the 18^th century, Haberman holds, literary journalism is on the rise and it is no longer just a supplier of news but rather a weapon in the politics of parties, taking on a new journalistic vocation: editing. Information trade is now the name of the fame, trading public opinion – the quintessential symbol of the public sphere. In other words, Habermas claims that the public sphere as we know it was formed when journalism became a public institution with the aim of promoting public debate. Only after the establishment of a democratic-bourgeois constitution could newspapers deal with public opinion for the purpose of commerce and not only for taking sides in a social-political debate (we are talking 1830's onwards). Due to the flow of private interests into the newspapers and mass media did changes in the public sphere begin to take shape, such as ideological content, commercials and so forth.  

But according to Habermas, the liberal model of the public sphere does not sit well with the modern industrialized democratic state, since the ideology involved with this model of the public sphere is tied with values that have changed since the 18^th century. Journalism and propaganda have expanded as well as the boundaries of the public and the public sphere. In addition, the public has lost it cohesion due to the high standards of meritocratic education which have created classes, gaps and conflicts which once resided in the private sphere but have now migrated to the public sphere. The private and public spheres have mixed with each other, social and political organizations are now invading each other. Thus, according to Habermas, a new feudalization of the public sphere is brought about.

The contemporary public sphere is characterized according to Habermas by the weathering of its critical roles and capacities. In the past publicity was used to subject people or the present political decisions to the public. Today the public sphere is recruited for the use of hidden policies by interest groups. For Habermas, the principles of the public sphere are weakening in the 20^th century. The public is no longer made out of masses of individuals but of organized people that institutionally exerting their influence on the public sphere and debate.  

See Also:

Habermas' / The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society - summary

Zizi Papacharissi / The virtual sphere: The internet as a public sphere – summary and review

The Public Sphere as a Feed: Habermas, Adorno, and the Managed Life of Opinion

Roger Silverstone - "Television, Ontological Security and Transitional Object"

In his "Television, Ontological Security and Transitional Object" Roger Silverstone argues that television protects the individual and that it is an inseparable part of him in the cognitive as well as the emotional levels, and that television fills his time and space. Silverstone's "Television, Ontological Security and Transitional Object" presents three perceptions that emphasize the importance of television: television offers ontological security – the mechanism which allows the individual to survive in society. According to Silverstone television grants us the sense of personal identity and a feeling of continuity of that identity. This security is established through "remote trust – a sense of ontological security without real life experience. Television (by means of its technological capabilities) links us to the world and gives us a sense of "remote trust" to the truth that it represents. In addition Silverstone argues that television provides us with a transitional object which allows in Winnicott's psychoanalysis to disengage from the mother and gain a sense of selfhood. Television fills the absence of the mother and the functions that she represents such as continuity, indestructibility (which caters ontological security), daily time patterns (regular viewing hours) and it organizes the domestic space with its central position in the household.

Silverstone believes that media in general and television in particular fills many function the everyday life of people. To begin with television structures our daily routine – people watch the same programs at the same hours. Furthermore, television structures the domestic space by the position it has in the house. Television, according to Silverstone, strengths the sense of ontological security in the individual and forms the basis of his personal identity and the continuity of that identity. Television also offers remote trust which helps us sustain our faith in reality without directly experiencing it. To most significant role Silverstone ascribes television in "Television, Ontological Security and Transitional Object"  is that of transitional object which is crucial for the formation of an independent identity.