Revisiting: The Critical Theory

The Frankfurt School consists of German philosophers who used the Marxist materialist foundations, and they tried to combine it with the Hegelian dialectics. These German philosophers, primarily Theodore Adorno and Max Horkheimer, applied this combination of theories to culture. Critical Theory started amid the 1920s, and it took off after these German philosophers, among others, left Nazi Germany to the United States. They fundamentally studied how the Nazis came into power and the causes behind that. Some of them, one of which is Adorno, started criticizing the American culture industries after he moved to the United States.

To have a better understanding of the Critical Theory, one must have a solid background on the Marxist Historical Materialism Theory and the Hegelian Dialectics Theory. To begin with the Historical Materialism Theory, Karl Marx applied the Hegelian Dialectics on societies. Marx found out that human societies along with their cultural institutions are the outcome of the collective economic activity (Historical Materialism, 2016). In other words, to understand human societies, one must understand their cultural institutions and vice versa. On the other hand, Georg Wilhem Friedrich Hegel focused in his Dialectics on treating nature as a whole instead of isolating it into separate parts (Gadamer, 1976). Additionally, to understand one part, whether science, society, or human nature, one must understand the whole; and in order to study something, one must study it along with its contradiction (Gadamer, 1976). What the Frankfurt School philosophers did was combining these two theories and applying them to culture; and that is how the Culture Industry started.

What is interesting about the Critical Theory is that it is not limited to a certain discipline; and that is how it differs from other models. The Critical Theory is similar to Pierre Bourdieu’s Social Capital Theory when he used the Marxist Economic Capital Theory and applied it to society. The Bourdieusian Social Capital Theory is not limited to a certain discipline either, for it is a combination between objectivism and subjectivism, and it can be easily applied to politics, culture, and society. Hence, the Critical Theory may be applied to literally anything. The Culture Industry is the product of the Critical Theory. Adorno and Horkheimer used the Culture Industry to study media. Media in the mid-1900s were limited to newspapers, radios, televisions, and magazines. Unlike other theories, the Critical Theory is able to view media platforms as means for economic gain, i.e. commodities. For instance, Lowenthal conducted a content analysis of biographies. He noticed that the biographies’ subjects were categorized into three main groups: 1) the spheres of political life, 2) the spheres of business and professions, and 3) the spheres of entertainment (Lazarsfeld et al., 1944). Lowenthal found a pattern: prior to the First World War, the percentage of political life and business and profession biographies was high, while the percentage of entertainment biographies was low (Lazarsfeld et al., 1944). Whereas, after the First World War, the percentage of entertainment biographies increased at the expense of political life and business and profession biographies (Lazarsfeld et al., 1944). Results showed that the media, in this case magazines, sell stories of what the public is interested in or what it wants to hear/read (Lazarsfeld et al., 1944). This shows that magazines were no longer interested in the significance of one’s biography. In another study that handled radio music, Adorno (1945) realized a shift in the music industry post-radio era. He gave an example about Bach considering himself as an artisan when he was in fact an artist (Adorno, 1945). He compared Bach to how music post-radio era started to get perceived as sublime and ethereal when it was in fact a commodity (Adorno, 1945).

Adorno’s and Horkheimer’s aim was not to “dictate” the music or art industries, as much as it was a form of awareness. They did not assume that the masses are cultural dupes either. They simply found a pattern where people felt some sort of obligation, or what some call it peer-pressure, to choose a music or art preference. As social scientists, it is part of their work to conduct studies about a certain pattern they encounter at a given society. And that is primarily why they studied this field. John Durham Peters discussed in his book chapter “The Subtlety of Horkheimer and Adorno” this particular issue. Peters (2003) pointed out that Adorno and Horkheimer did not address the masses as cultural dupes, they rather viewed them as active members. Additionally, he highlighted the two barriers of understanding the Culture Industry Theory. The first barrier is its odd composition, and the second is cross-cultural.

Given the Critical Theory is non-disciplinary, it can be easily applied to the media systems in 2020. Because the Critical Theory is a fusion between Historical Materialism Theory and the Hegelian Dialectics Theory, one should go back to primitive social media in order to study its current form. Internet Relay Chat (IRC) was established in 1988, and it became popular in the 1990s (Herring, 1996). Shortly after that, the first social media platform, Six Degrees, was launched in 1997 (Herring, 1996). Six Degrees was primarily created as a form of communication with other users (Herring, 1996). The main purpose behind social media platforms at the beginning of the 21st century was plainly communication. As far as I can remember, there was MySpace, MSN, Facebook, and Twitter. After the social media peak in 2009, and the blast of Blackberry and Blackberry Messenger (BBM), things started to get a little different. Just like the example of music, social media platforms changed from being utterly a form of communication into a commodity. BBM users sort of started to have a small competition among them of who has the newest Blackberry device. And exactly how the best music genre was decided among listeners post-radio era, the “Bold” Blackberry devices were thought to be the “best”. There were no rules for this so-called competition, but looking at it from Marxist perspective, it was the rich kids who decided which is what. Once again, the term commodity reigns. Blackberry devices and BBM stopped being common amid late 2013; this is when iPhone devices became popular. Unlike Blackberry devices, iPhone devices were not limited to a specific social media platform. Given its at least 16-GB space, iPhone users were able to download Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook applications on their devices. Instagram, among other social media platforms, i.e., Twitter and Facebook, was a platform to upload and edit pictures. A while after the recognition of Instagram, companies and individuals started using it as an advertisement platform. Companies and individuals were able to reach a number of sales on Instagram. Currently, companies and individuals are relying on selling goods through Instagram, Twitter, and Facebook. One cannot go over selling goods without mentioning the new phenomenon of advertisements that pop every couple of stories, or the advertisements Facebook and Twitter show after tracking your search engine via algorithms. I do not think Adorno and Horkheimer would be impressed by the media systems of 2020 or social media. Their stances would remain the same if their critique of the culture industries took place amid the media systems of 2020. If the media systems of 2020 are compared to the radio music critique in 1945, the same results would appear. Social media platforms or the most preferred music genres would be the outcome (or victim) of collective economic activity. It is notable here to mention that Jurgen Habermas’ public sphere is also applicable today. Public sphere according to the Haberasian explanation can be applied in the sense where people with similar preferences meet on a certain social media platform. To clarify, there are groups on Facebook for fans of a particular series. Taking Game of Thrones as an example, people on such groups shared their thoughts about the latest episodes, their expectations, and their theories, etc. This shows that the Frankfurt School’s Culture Industry Theory is not rigid; it can be applied to all media platforms. Adorno and Horkheimer succeeded in making their theory everlasting.

References

Adorno, T. W. (1945). A Social Critique of Radio Music. Kenyon College, 229–235.

Cornforth, M. (1954). Historical Materialism. New York: International Publishers.

Gadamer, H.-G. (1976). Hegel’s Dialectic Five Hermeneutical Studies. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Habermas, J. (1974). The Public Sphere: An Encyclopedia Article (1964). The German Critique, 49–55.

Herring, S. C. (1996). Computer-Mediated Communication. Philadelphia: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Historical Materialism. (2016). (Routledge, Producer, & Taylor and Francis) Retrieved from New Connection to Classical and Contemporary Perspectives Social Theory Re-wired: http://routledgesoc.com/category/profile-tags/historical-materialism

Peters, J. D. (2003). The Subtlety of Horkheimer and Adorno: Reading “The Culture Industry”.

Stanton, P. F. (1944). Radio Research 1942–1943. New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce.