What would John Dewey think of social media?

What would John Dewey think of social media? We don't know, of course. He was born in 1859 and died in 1952. But I suggest that he was one of the first to think about the questions we now ask about social media.

Here are some passages from The Public and Its Problems, which he published in 1927, nearly a century ago. I'm quoting from the open access Standard EBooks edition.

I'm only quoting passages here, not writing an essay. I was struck by their relevance to current debates and want to inject them into current discussions.

First a little background on his concept of the public:

Dewey distinguishes the small group of people directly affected by our actions (roughly, the private sphere) from the larger group indirectly affected by our actions (roughly, the public). See pp. 12, 29.

If we count the faintest and most tenuous, remote, and delayed consequences of our actions, then our public might include everyone, though he doesn't discuss this. To tighten the concept, he eventually describes the public as those affected by the most significant consequences of our actions. In his words, the public consists of those affected by the "indirect, extensive, enduring, and serious consequences" of our "conjoint and interacting behavior" (p. 98). At p. 51 he adds "important" and at p. 99 he adds "intricate".

The public can be "inchoate", "amorphous and unarticulated" (p. 102), and unaware of itself (p. 22). But it can also be organized, aware of itself, and able to articulate itself (pp. 95, 142).

Because the public is affected by our actions, it has an interest in regulating them. Or rather, it comes into being when we feel the need to regulate the actions that affect us. In one definition (p. 14), the public consists of "all those who are affected by the indirect consequences of [our actions] to such an extent that it is deemed necessary to have those consequences systematically cared for" (emphasis added).

Dewey distinguishes the public from the society and the state, and devotes much of his book to their complex relationships. But I won't go into that here.

Here's the connection to modern technology and social media:

Because technology can enlarge the circle of people affected by our actions, technology can enlarge the public. In fact, technology has done more to enlarge the public than any other force in history.

Steam and electricity have done more to alter the conditions under which men associate together than all the agencies which affected human relationships before our time. [p. 109]

There are those who lay the blame for all the evils of our lives on steam, electricity and machinery. It is always convenient to have a devil as well as a savior to bear the responsibilities of humanity. In reality, the trouble springs rather from the ideas and absence of ideas in connection with which technological factors operate. Mental and moral beliefs and ideals change more slowly than outward conditions. [pp. 109-110]

Since the aims, desires and purposes created by a machine age do not connect with tradition, there are two sets of rival ideals, and those which have actual instrumentalities at their disposal have the advantage." [p. 110]

In some passages he's an optimist about technology. But this optimism is qualified by an awareness that technology changes faster than our thinking, including our moral and political thinking. It can enlarge and alter the public long before we're able to catch up, adapt, and regulate. It can keep the public amorphous and prevent it from organizing and knowing itself.

We have the physical tools of communication as never before. The thoughts and aspirations congruous with them are not communicated, and hence are not common. Without such communication the public will remain shadowy and formless, seeking spasmodically for itself, but seizing and holding its shadow rather than its substance. [p. 110]

Capacities are limited by the objects and tools at hand. They are still more dependent upon the prevailing habits of attention and interest which are set by tradition and institutional customs. [p. 162]

I may add more passages and interpretations later. Right now I just want to put these into circulation.