In 1909, Charles H. Cooley observed his era’s rapidly changing cultural and political contexts and discussed their relationship with the sudden hold the mass media were taking on society in the United States. His optimistic and enthusiastic espousal of the new communication technologies included dreamy predictions about the possibilities these emerging media imply for the state of humanity, both socially and psychologically.

Cooley claimed that the proliferation of newspapers and other texts, the new telephone, the extended use of the telegraph, combined with faster and expanding transportation – particularly railroads –to increase the swiftness and diffusion of information and ideas. The increase in the speed and accessibility of communication, he argued, had a profound impact on the very ways we structure thought, interpret the world, and establish social interaction and institutions.

Not only would these emerging mass media allow for "one lively mental whole," but they would raise consciousness, "awaken the mind, abating sensuality, and giving men idea and purpose," in turn enforcing "a popular, somewhat vulgar, but sound and human standard of morality" (p.85). The new media would allow us to be sympathetic, foster a public will which would eventually "get hold of the institutions of society," and "bring the past into the present, and [make] notable every achievement of the race a possible factor in its current life" (pp.86-87). What a legacy he has given us! And what an alluring vision.

Now, nearly 100 years later, we can look upon these predictions made at the brink of the communications revolution of the 20^th century, and ask, was his optimism justified? Was his vision a myopic pipe dream, or an insightful perspective on the sweeping social changes that followed?

From one perspective, Cooley was living in a dreamworld, and his predictions could scarcely have been more wrong. Certainly we have extended into new intercourse and moved beyond merely local considerations. But instead of organizing ourselves on intelligence and sympathy, we have become more fragmented, lost our communities, isolated ourselves into race-, class-, region- and religious-based groups with little or no compassion for those who are different. We have re-interpreted history to serve current purposes instead of learning from it; we have lost common idea and purpose to self-centered, greedy consumerism; our consciousness, far from being awakened and abating sensuality, has vaulted into senseless, unreasoned, and prejudiced judgements and ideas; our standard of morality has not developed into a sound and human one, but rather a fragmented, hotly contested, and often conflicting diversity of codes and social rules. We have ceased to put our children at the top of our priorities; we have habituated ourselves to information-poor and sensation-rich news; we have lost interest in the common good and the democratic process; we have become a more violent, angry, impatient, and suspicious nation. Importantly, Cooley’s inspiring mass media have been blamed time and again for all these troubles and more.

While I can not claim that Cooley’s optimistic vision of mass media’s impact has come to pass, I do argue that in the past 100 years, some of his visions have come to fruition – not always in the most gentle of ways, but none-the-less improving on what came before.

The people of the United States have changed radically since 1909, and mass media are certainly a critical part of that change. Information and discussion indeed have increased, especially for those who were (probably) not a part of Cooley’s vision: women and African Americans. Educational attainment is far higher now, there are proportionately far more people with 12+ years of schooling than ever in our country’s history. Mass media have helped people inform themselves and take advantage of information not only through dissemination of texts and materials, but also through increased knowledge about the choices and avenues open to them.

While we are in some ways a fragmented nation of isolated groups, I feel confident that Cooley and his contemporaries had a far poorer understanding and connection to other cultures, other peoples, other religions, and other idea systems than we do. Certainly not all are sympathetic of those differences, but the mass media have opened up possibilities of sympathy such that many certainly have done their best. We have numerous non-profit organizations designed to help the poor, disabled, or disenfranchised; we have Black History Month; we have the International Day of Women; we have celebrations of Chanukah, Christmas, and Kwaanza in schools; we have developed our ideals to include mutual respect among all races, genders, creeds, and sexual orientations; we have anti-discrimination laws and policies. Thus we have indeed seen sympathy "take hold of our institutions" and become entrenched in the consciousness of society. We have more ways than ever to develop, determine, and discuss our "will," and explore its relationship to society. We have, as Cooley predicted, found it easier for "more discriminating minds to unite in small groups" and set free human nature. Perhaps many would argue that human nature has proven to disappoint us in its composition, but none-the-less, we are more able to find those like us and explore the world around us than were the inhabitants of 1909.

At the very least, the impact of the mass media on human rights, global consciousness, international interconnection, personal choices and freedoms, and access to the world around us have not gone in the opposite direction Cooley implies. The freedom of and increasingly universal access to information, our ability to create and maintain relationships over previously unimagined distances, and the multitude of lively debates, exchanges, and perspectives have given us more of the world than ever before. Certainly the results haven’t all been good ones, but I, for one, would not give them up.

No change, however, can occur without painful adjustment and loss. Cooley’s warning about the psychological impact these increased choices and perceptions can have on us are well heeded. He observes that "the springs of progress," although stimulating, require us to spread out the mind very thinly over our civilization. Increased self-consciousness and choice brings a burden of responsibility and stress, unrest and strain. Cooley predicted that the mass media would contribute to a loss of our ignorant, pastoral contentment. Indeed, even if his predictions do not ring true to you in any other way, this one is undeniable. Information may be power, but ignorance is bliss.