In Harold Innis’ The bias of Communication he argues that communication media’s shape how societies understand history power and space. Medias develop a favour of time bias or space bias which are dependent on which bias they are better at. Time bias medias are used to preserve knowledge across long period of time. An example that can be used for time bias is oral traditions or stone monuments. These time bias medias focus on cultural memory. Space bias media are used to spread across large spaces, expanding communication across distance. Space bias medias are better at focusing on the present.
The video “Why the Battle of Vimy Ridge Matters” is mostly space biased. It is a short 15 minute video that was made for a broad audience, this way it is able to spread information quickly and widely. It discusses the importance of the battle and shows that it is a key moment in Canadian nation building. Because the video is designed to be short and accessible, it can simplify the history of the battle, making the focus on a clear national narrative. From Innis’s perspective it could be seen as a part of the modern media environment that prioritizes quick communication and emotional impact over an actual historical understanding. But at the same time I would say it might be unfair to say that this kind of media automatically weakens historical awareness. The video could be seen as a starting point that introduces people to the topic and helps them learn more. In this way a space biased medium might still help people connect to history instead of just replacing forms of historical memory.
The Government of Canada website would be a combination of time and space bias. The actual monument is time bias, as it is build from stone, hard to transport and physically preserves the memory of Canadian soldiers. The monument represents ann attempt to keep historical memory over a long period of time. The website itself would be considered space bias because it allows people around the world to access the information instantly. The website is able to expand the reach of remembrance across space making the memorial part of a broader national narrative that can go past the physical site. The government is also able to shape how the story of Vimy Ridge is presented to a large audience.
I do believe that these artifacts help Canadians know the past in ways that shape the nation in the future and the present. The Vimy Monument plays an important role because it physically preserves the memory of the battle overtime. It keeps the history of Vimy Ridge present and reminds people of the sacrifices that were made by Canadian soldiers. In a different way, the video and the website help spread the memory more widely. Through the digital forms people can still learn about the battle and why it matters. Because of these reasons is why Vimy Ridge continues to remain part of how Canadians think about their national identity.
I think this kind of digital access is important because it makes the history feel more connected to life and not something that is just found in textbooks. It makes me wonder how much my understanding of events like Vimy Ridge is shaped and influences by the way they are presented online and if these kinds of media help engage more with history or simplify these events to simpler national stories.
I think you did a great job clearly explaining the difference between time-biased and space-biased media. I also liked how you didn't just criticize space-biased media, but instead suggested that it can act as a starting point for people to engage with history. One thing your post made me think about is whether the government's role in shaping the website might limit alternative perspectives on Vimy. Another thing your post made me think about is how the emotional impact of the video might shape how viewers interpret Vimy compared to the more informational tone of the website. What are your thoughts on that?
ReplyDeleteWell done explaining Innis’ idea of time vs. space bias and your definitions are clear and easy to follow and cover everything we have talked about in class. I also like your point that the CBC video, even though it’s space-biased, doesn’t necessarily weaken historical understanding but can act as a starting point. That feels important, especially since most people won’t actually visit the Vimy site in France and a point I missed in my reflection.
ReplyDeleteBuilding on that, I agree with the other comment about the emotional impact of the video. Because it’s short and designed to engage viewers, it probably shapes how people feel about Vimy (as a nation-building moment), while the website feels more informational and controlled. That difference might really affect how people interpret the event.
Your point about the government website is also interesting to push further since it’s an official source, it likely presents a more unified national narrative. That could limit alternative perspectives or debates about Vimy (like the conscription tensions you mentioned), even while it helps preserve memory.
Overall, I think your post shows really well how these media don’t just share history they shape how Canadians understand identity today.