-
Infrastructure requirement parallels between the printing press and the internet – printing presses and computers
- Something about distribution? One printing press in a city is enough to produce a lot of books, but one computer in a city is probably not as useful (or at least provides a different kind of usefulness)
- Volume of communication vs. speed of communication
-
Naughton’s book was written in 2013 so we have benefit more from hindsight
- Is it appropriate to draw parallels with the invention of the Internet?
Yes: in general, I think that it is appropriate to draw parallels between the invention of the printing press and the invention of the Internet. Both inventions led to an information cost collapse, which naturally causes them to enable types of growth. The printing press made the books cheaper and standardized, allowing rapid growth in science, advertising, and the dissemination of individual ideas (as in the case of Martin Luther’s Protestantism), as discussed by Naughton. There are clear parallels to be drawn here with the internet. It’s indisputable that the exchange of scientific ideas is now happening faster than ever thanks to online journal distribution and remote collaboration. Digital marketing and advertising has become embedded in every day life, even becoming foundation of today’s industrial giants (Google’s revenue is overwhelmingly driven by ads). Likewise, it’s easier than ever for people to express and spread their personal ideas with the invention of personal blogging and social media. Many other parallels could be drawn here, such as the economic growth, intellectual property, and accessibility points discussed by Naughton.
Aside from the obvious parallels in growth, other aspects also ring true. For example, the printing press caused the “age of reason” where individuals are considered to be responsible adults to be shifted from 7 to 12, due to the additional time required for reading competence. Now it seems that this age has shifted again, closer to 16-18. It would be irresponsible to draw a naive parallel and attribute this entirely to the additional time of developing Internet competence, as one could point out that modern curriculums are more rigorous. Yet, it seems obviously true that the Internet (or more broadly, digital literacy) has played a some role in this shift.
- Does history help us in this respect, or does it obscure?
While I argued above that there are parallels to be drawn between the invention of the printing press and the Internet, I think there are enough notable differences between the two that history may serve to obscure, not help. At the very least, we cannot be overly reliant on history.
For example, a point where I think the analogy breaks down is the speed, scale, and breadth of adoption. In Module 2b, we were told that Gutenberg’s press led to the production of 10-12 million books in Europe after 50 years. In contrast, after ~40 years of its invention, around 6 billion people around the world use the Internet today (https://www.itu.int/itu-d/reports/statistics/2025/10/15/ff25-internet-use/). Even if we restrict it to just Europe to adhere to the original scale, there are likely around 700 million people using the Internet (https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Digital_economy_and_society_statistics_-_households_and_individuals). Furthermore, Internet adoption is likely a lot more diffused across the entire population compared to the printed books, which were relatively concentrated to wealthier households and scholars. Thus, I think it would be irresponsible to rely on the printing press here as a perfect analogy; the much faster spread of the internet makes it so that humanity has less time to adapt and make a smooth transition.
Another key difference is that the Internet is much more powerful as a medium of individual communication than the printing press. The printing press didn’t make it faster for someone in London to communicate with someone in Munich; you could print the letter, but the means of travel would be the same (it would probably actually take extra time because of the printing process). In contrast, the Internet allows for near-instantaneous communication between different parties across the world, making its implications on society more multi-faceted than the printing press. Overly relying on the historical impact of the printing press as a device for considering the impact of the Internet would overlook this critical technological difference.