Mediatization, polarization, and intolerance (between environments, media, and circulation)

Among Media: The place of mediatization 279 tive, methodological, and cognitive path. However, it is necessary to consider that, between media and mediatization, technology and communication, man and machine, there is a co-naturality that confirms technicity like a characteristic principle of con - temporary subjectivation. The medialogy that studied the technical media as in- struments for the use of utilitarian communication observed conceptual polarizations that met the epistemological demands of CommunicationTheories, notably in themass, which, however, and as a cultural industry, already had distinct social and politi- cal characteristics. Observing these characteristics is fundamen- tal to understand the strained articulation between concepts of communication that, despite information and, above all, obeying a linear-utilitarian tendency, are present in the first media that ignored differences between conceptual matrices and opted for an epistemology supported by the conviction of investigative certainty. Thus, they moved away from the heuristic possibili- ties that, considering the phenomenological bases but surpass- ing them, seek, in the contemporary, a genealogical arché that can generate other concepts of communication or evolution of these concepts, attentive to the narrow but strained relationship that we can observe between communication and information, tautological relations of simple causality and the cognitive com- plexities interested in the production of new knowledge. In this density, it is possible to catch the not evident but profound rela- tionship established between technical media and communica- tive media and, above all, it instigates to know what relationship is found between media, medialogy, and mediatization. Currently, it is impossible to study media, medialogy, and mediatization as unrelated concepts and epistemologies because relations are established between them, bringing them closer together, although we observe each one’s specific char - acteristics. It is a hypothesis to admit that the evolution of the relationships between technical and communicative media have interfered in the way and sense of what can be understood by communication medialogy and, above all, to perceive the conse- quences that those relationships are building between mediati- zation processes which, although affected by new digital tech- nologies, are distinct as communication and information.