Marc Prensky response to Douglas Rushkoff

Dissertation, absolutely not. Books and articles, yes. Footnotes, occasionally. ;-) There's clearly a place for recalling things that have been written and said in the past (which, if used, should certainly be noted.) There's clearly a place, too, for academic type writing, although it's not something I do or aspire to (for which I get both criticism and praise).
I have no problem with introducing what others have said as points of departure. My point was that using McLuhan or anyone else to bolster arguments about things that they never experienced, particularly given that they are no longer there to represent their (possibly changed) positions, is artificial, at best. This is precisely because it typically depends more on our (differing) interpretation of what they meant, as the discussion showed, than on what they actually said. I was trying to say that I would rather talk about the merits of the argument at hand than discuss our varying interpretations of McLuhan (or anyone else.) I didn't mean to take us off-track.

That said, I do love a great quote. I heard this one, from Seneca (of Rome, not NY) last night:

"As is a tale, so is life. Not how long it is, but how good it is, is what matters."

Yours in brevity (and peace),
Marc