Communication media form only where selection has become contingent and improbable

Evidence

Communication media are raised above the taken-for-granted reality of normal life only where influence is contingent and thereby, for once, rather improbable. Only when, and in so far as, goods are scarce does the active claim to some of them on the part of one person become a problem for others, and this situation is then regulated by a communication medium, which transfers the action selected by the one person into the experience of the others and so makes it acceptable. In the context of scarcity, influence becomes precarious in a special way, so that, in view of this unusual situation, a specifically generalized communication medium can take shape, which makes possible the transmission of reduced complexity in this case, but not in others. — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 605

Categorization

• XREF: The contingent-improbability condition for media formation parallels the condition Giddens describes for trust in expert systems — trust becomes necessary precisely where direct knowledge fails; Stevens trusts Darlington’s judgment because he cannot evaluate it himself. — connects to: Differentiated societies develop generalized communication media to bridge their subsystems.; All communication media presuppose double contingent selectivity between partners — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 592; Trust and power are generalized media converting improbable contingencies into stable meaning systems (+5 more)
• corroborated: 2 independent passages support this claim — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 605

Broader Connections

• Trust and power are generalized media converting improbable contingencies into stable meaning systems #corroborates (0.80)
• Indeterminacy and unexercised possibility underpin the generalization of influence #expands (0.80)
• Contingency is the central problem generalized media must solve #corroborates (0.75)