Skip to content
1981
Volume 24, Issue 1
  • ISSN: 1539-7785
  • E-ISSN: 2048-0717

Abstract

The shifting sands of ethics have implications for communication, namely how humans communicate ideas, how the technologies they use shape and enable the sharing of ideas, how the current information environment stifles or empowers ideas, etc. In the postmodern era, there is no one all-encompassing communication ethic, but myriad ethics in the plural sense. To move the conversation beyond situational ethics, this essay follows a relational approach, more precisely, an ecological approach. An ecological approach applies the interdisciplinary background of media ecology and the foundational tenet that the medium is the message to give an account of ethics, what Strate labelled . Media ecology has been defined as the study of media as environments. This definition and much of media ecology’s practice make it a pragmatic tool for studying many facets of communication, including ethics, which implies a sense of place. This sense is often lost due to technological innovation and media. Technologies and media erode individual choice and context, both of which are important in studying ethics. Media ecology ethics, as envisioned by Strate and expressed in this article, become a way of balancing and restoring a sense of place. Applying media ecology ethics as a response to the changes in modern media and the decentring of the postmodern moment is a call to scholars and laypersons alike. Human history is a testament to uncertainty and change. Media ecology ethics emphasizes the need to question, adapt and ultimately persevere amidst the changes in horizons.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1386/eme_00231_1
2025-07-22
2026-04-21

Metrics

Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Arneson, P. (ed.) (2007), Exploring Communication Ethics: Interviews with Influential Scholars in the Field, New York: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Arnett, R. C. (2018), ‘Communication ethics research: Evolution and thoughtful response’, in L. Plaisance (ed.), Communication and Media Ethics, Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 391406.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Bateson, G. ([1972] 2000), Steps to an Ecology of Mind, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Berger, E. (2022), Context Blindness: Digital Technology and the Next Stage of Human Evolution, New York: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Crockett, M. J. (2017), ‘Moral outrage in the digital age’, Nature Human Behaviour, 1:11, pp. 76971, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-017-0213-3.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Fritz, J. M. H., McManus, L. M. B. and Kearney, M. R. (2023), Communication Ethics Literacy: Dialogue & Difference, 3rd ed., Dubuque: Kendall Hunt.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Hyde, M. J. (2011), ‘Ethics, rhetoric, and discourse’, in G. Cheney, S. May and D. Mushi (eds), The Handbook of Communication Ethics, New York: Routledge, pp. 3144.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Innis, H. A. ([1951] 1968), The Bias of Communication, Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. MacIntyre, A. ([1966] 2002), A Short History of Ethics: A History of Moral Philosophy from the Homeric Age to the Twentieth Century, 2nd ed., Notre Dame: Notre Dame Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. MacIntyre, A. ([1981] 2007), After Virtue, 3rd ed., Notre Dame: Notre Dame Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Marciano, L., Camerini, A. L. and Morese, R. (2021), ‘The developing brain in the digital era: A scoping review of structural and functional correlates of screen time in adolescence’, Frontiers in Psychology, 12, pp. 115, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.671817.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. McLuhan, M. ([1964] 1994), Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. McLuhan, M. (1970), Culture is Our Business, New York: Ballantine Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Meyrowitz, J. (1985), No Sense of Place: The Impact of Electronic Media on Social Behavior, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. O’Gieblyn, M. (2021), God, Human, Animal, Machine: Technology, Metaphor, and the Search for Meaning, New York: Doubleday Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Ong, W. J. (2013), Orality and Literacy: 30th Anniversary Edition, London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Postman, N. (1970), ‘The reformed English curriculum’, in A. C. Eurich (ed.), High School 1980: The Shape of the Future in American Secondary Education, New York: Pitman, pp. 16068.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Postman, N. (1979), Teaching as a Conserving Activity, New York: Delacorte.
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Postman, N. ([1985] 2005), Amusing Ourselves to Death: Public Discourse in the Age of Show Business, New York: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Postman, N. (1992), Technopoly: The Surrender of Culture to Technology, New York: Vintage.
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Postman, N. (1996), The End of Education: Redefining the Value of School, New York: Vintage.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Postman, N. (1999), Building a Bridge to the 18th Century: How the Past Can Improve Our Future, New York: Vintage.
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Postman, N. (2000), ‘The humanism of media ecology’, Proceedings of the Media Ecology Association, 1:1, pp. 1016.
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Postman, N. and Weingartner, C. (1969), Teaching as a Subversive Activity, New York: Dell Publishing Co.
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Postman, N. and Weingartner, C. (1971), The Soft Revolution: A Student Handbook for Turning Schools Around, New York: Delacorte Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Rushkoff, D. (2014), Present Shock: When Everything Happens Now, New York: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Rushkoff, D. (2019), Team Human, New York: W. W. Norton & Company.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Stanton, A. (2008), WALL-E, USA: Pixar/Disney.
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Strate, L. (2006), Echoes and Reflections: On Media Ecology as a Field of Study, Cresskill: Hampton Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Strate, L. (2017), Media Ecology: An Approach to Understanding the Human Condition, New York: Peter Lang.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Strate, L. (2020), ‘Ethics and the study of media as environments’, Explorations in Media Ecology, 19:1, pp. 522, https://doi.org/10.1386/eme_00021_1.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Strate, L. (2022), Concerning Communication: Epic Quests and Lyric Excursions within the Human Lifeworld, Forest Hills: Institute of General Semantics.
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Thayer, L. (2010), ‘Ethics unwired: Some retrospections’, in C. Anton (ed.), Valuation and Media Ecology: Ethics, Morals, and Laws, Cresskill: Hampton Press, pp. 3749.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Turkle, S. ([2011] 2017), Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other, New York: Basic Books.
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Turkle, S. (2016), Reclaiming Conversation: The Power of Talk in a Digital Age, New York: Penguin.
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Uhls, Y. T., Michikyan, M., Morris, J., Garcia, D., Small, G. W., Zgourou, E. and Greenfield, P. M. (2014), ‘Five days at outdoor education camp without screens improves preteen skills with nonverbal emotion cues’, Computers in Human Behavior, 39, pp. 38792, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.036.
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/10.1386/eme_00231_1
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a success
Invalid data
An error occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test