in people’s texts, acknowledged or 
unacknowledged, in media commentary, in 
discussions, whenever we are trying to consider 
the effects of new media. He’s fragmented. The 
interesting thing about his relevance now of 
course is that in the wake of postmodernism, 
deconstructionism and a whole series of 
intellectual movements, McLuhan no longer seems 
so eccentric. 


Q:  Are there areas where McLuhan’s ideas fall 
flat? Do his detractors make any points that are 
legitimate?