The internet is a distribution channel, not a medium. It’s more of a logistical model than anything else. The internet just happens to be a distribution channel that cannot only distribute a variety of media, but can do so all at once.
The internet is really just a change in logistical technology that happens to threaten several other distinct industrial infrastructures simultaneously. In that respect, it’s more of an economic development than a media one. It’s simply changed the balance of supply and demand for a bunch of other media (print, audio, and video) by making it them all more accessible.
For example, video is a medium, television isn’t. What television is, rather, is a distribution model for video. Television didn’t really do anything to change motion pictures. And neither has the internet. It’s only made content from that medium more accessible — kinda like how cargo planes made fresh produce more accessible without changing it.
The internet is just a change in the accessibility of media – both its consumption and distribution. It’s doing to four different media (text, audio, images, annd motion) what BETA and VHS technology did to video alone. It’s like the printing press, telegraph, telephone, radio, and television all rolled into one.
The only way in which the internet differs is where other developments opened up the way for a new and distinct industrial infrastructures, the internet is challenging each and everyone of those industries all at once. It’s kinda of like an industrial restructuring thats brings a bunch of separate division under one roof.
So the future of industrial media will manifest in terms of media entities: conglomerate media organizations that trade simultaneously in four different media: text, imagery, audio, and motion picture. After all, with this new logistical technology makes certain economies of scope that anyone who doesn’t pursue them will be uncompetitive.
