ABSTRACT
In this commentary I address some of the key ideas presented in Kolar-Panov's paper titled 'Video as the diasporic imagination of selfhood: a case study of the Croatians in Australia' which was published in Cultural Studies 10: 2, 1996. My own research, conducted during the same period, on the same group of migrants and in the same country, found very little evidence to support some of the assertions made in the paper. I therefore challenge the author's main assumptions about the impact of video technology on the formation of diaspora identities and address some of the theoretical issues behind the notion that video technology is the first widespread postmodern communication medium. I highlight the intrinsic similarities between telecast and video technologies and show how Kolar-Panov's argument tends to slide into both technological and social determinism.
