ABSTRACT
This commentary is an elaboration of points found in the Acker chapter and the Gagnon commentary, rather than a criticism of them. Basically, I am in agreement with the main points found in both works, and many of my points are complementary to theirs. I will start by developing a list of implications that can be drawn from an example Acker used to demonstrate that terms often fail to describe the state of new technology. The first implications explicate some of the difficulties involved in predicting the uses of a new technology. Additional implications lead to the question of whether the ultimate goal of a new communication system is being functionally equivalent to an older communication mode. I then discuss a new technology project—the development of a computer news system—in which we are attempting to go beyond the goal of functional equivalence. Moving beyond functional equivalence requires the socially open architecture proposed by Acker; new goals must emerge from interactions with the new technology. The aspect of socially open architecture I wish to elaborate upon is the kind of effort required by users. If individuals are to contribute significantly to the new goals, they must be self-reflective, else the locus of control lies in the technology. The emergence of new goals in turn raises methodological issues that become manifest during research done during the design stages of the technology. Verbalizing attempts at self-reflection can create data, the validity of which is most likely to be challenged within an experimental paradigm. Rather than pick sides, however, the designer and implementer should internalize any conflict.
