A Case Study of Community Development Using McLuhan’s Law of Media
Abstract
Professional engagement at the grassroots level is common for community developement within communities where subtle and delicate variations of physical and economic decline, social isolation, and political disempowerment is evident. Community development practitioners work with community groups to liberate oppressed populations by developing and implementing practices which help to reclaim the personal power of people within marginalized communities. The media tools and methods used by some community development practitioners, to improve neighborhood conditions and the wellbeing of the individuals, are perceived by practitioners to be value-free and neutral ways for problem solving. However, some in the communities would argue that the tools used are highly politicized. This paper applied Marshall McLuhan’s law of media (McLuhan & McLuhan, 1988) to assist in establishing a general conceptual framework to both examine the social implication of media technology for community development. The finding, which uncover a media paradox, provide a guidepost for the professional practice of community development being a continuous process of defining and redefining our social goals.
A Case Study of Community Development Using McLuhan’s Law of Media
Professional engagement at the grassroots level is common in communities where subtle and delicate variations of physical and economic decline, social isolation, and political disempowerment exist. Community development becomes highly politicized in these areas (because…). The drive to improve neighborhood conditions and the wellbeing of individuals and families is a daunting task. Establishing a common understanding of the relationship between community development and positive social change, is a challenge because community development can be defined differently by various people. For example, during the early 1990s at least 25 different definitions of community development circulated widely throughout the community development literature (Garcia, Giuliani, & Wiesenfeld, 1999). The concept of social engagement and change is even more elusive, considering the different theories of society developed by social scientists and theorists (Filmer, Jenks, Searle, & Walsh, 1998). Inspite of these inconsistencies, community development is generally perceived by practitioners to be a means that is value-free and neutral for helping groups to solve problems. This paper re-examined the meaning of community development within the context of the increasing complexities imposed by the modern media environment. New electronic technology and emerging developments in web-based social media are, indeed, becoming increasing more popular for communicating various forms of social and environmental information throughout society (Sui & Goodchild, 2001). This paper will take a closer look at the extent to which McLuhan’s law of media can be applied to examine the impact of community development as a new medium.
Canadian communication theorist Marshall McLuhan made a name for himself in the 1960s and 1970s with his groundbreaking studies concerning the impact of media on individuals and on society. McLuhan’s studies on media are best represented by his trilogy: The Mechanical Bride: Folklore of Industrial Man (1951), The Gutenberg Galaxy: The Making of Typographic Man (1962), and Understanding Media: The Extension of Man (1964). With the emergence of the Internet and the information superhighway, McLuhan’s theories make greater sense in the current decade than they did in 1960s (Biro, 2000). The following brief introduction to McLuhan’s law of media was used to uncover various unexplored dimensions of community development and the capacity of community development to have a positive social effect on those delicate variations of physical and economic decline, social isolation, and political disempowerment.
McLuhan was hailed by his supporters for his ability to probe human perceptions that had been constrained and dulled by the emerging and ever-changing technical environment (Cathcart & Gumpert, 1986). McLuhan argued that there have been three dominant modes of communication throughout human history: oral (speech), writing (printing press), and electronic media. Each dominant medium has produced strikingly different psychic and physical impacts on individuals and on society as a whole. McLuhan summarized these effects concisely in his law of media, which was presented within a tetradic framework in a book coauthored with his son Eric (McLuhan & McLuhan, 1988). McLuhan’s law of media has four major elements: Any innovation in communication media will invariably (a) intensify or enhance certain aspects of a given culture while at the same time (b) making certain aspects of human mental ability or cultural practice obsolete. Furthermore, all media innovations (c) retrieve a phase of cultural practice long forgotten and (d) undergo a reversal when extended beyond the limit of their potential, such that when a culture is saturated with a particular type of medium there is a reversal effect with respect to the original intent of that media.
Method
Case study research excels at providing an understanding of complex issues or objects and can extend experience or add strength to what has already been demonstrated by previous research. This qualitative research method is designed to examine contemporary “real-life” situations and provides a basis for the application of ideas and extension of methods. Researcher Robert K. Yin (1984) defined the case study research method as an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, when the boundaries between phenomena and context are not clearly evident and where multiple sources of evidence are used (p. 23).
The case study approach is especially useful for organizing a wide range of perspectives and then seeking patterns and themes (Feagin, Orum, & Sjoberg, 1991), and I will use it to explore the neutrality of the tools used in community development. Working with McLuhan’s law of media, and viewing community development as a form of media, this paper explores a hypothetical tetrad-like analysis of community development to reveal the fuzzy, paradoxical, and ambivalent nature of community development. This paper calls for a shift in perspective that will allow community development to fulfill various democratic ideals in society. Viewing community development as a medium for communication rather than as an instrument for problem solving, enabled me to critically examine how people and environments have been represented, manipulated, and visualized within community development. This examination, in turn, allowed me to promote a more autonomous and liberating community development practice.
The paper presents a tetradic case study that was conducted by applying the four questions raised in McLuhan’s framework to the relationship between community development and McLuhan’s law of media. For the purposes of this paper, community development is defined as a dynamic collection of complex, interacting webs of social, economic, political, and cultural relationships among individuals and institutions whose goal is positive social change (Chevalier & Buckles, 2008). The primary value expressed within community development is that collaborative and cooperative interactions build consensus and produce meaningful outcomes (Chevalier and Buckles, p.15). Media are generally understood as a means of sending messages or communicating information, in addition to being the instrument by which mass communication takes place in a modern society (Brügger & Kolstrop, 2002). In a very general sense, community development can be understood as a new technology in an already crowded media jungle, a media technology specifically focused on the communication of development information.
Marshall McLuhan’s law of media is invoked in this paper to demonstrate how media theories can shed light on the social implications of community development, and particularly community development as a medium. Community development has increasingly become a means to communicate certain aspects of the real world to the general public, from the general public. In the end, the goal of all community development is to communicate information to society at large in order to reach social consensus on a variety of issues. All other functions, such as empowerment and social policy change, are intermediate steps serving primarily as means to an end, which is communication.
Literature Review
Many authors, notably Jacques Ellul (1965), Marshall McLuhan (1962) and Lewis Mumford (1934), have written about the impact of modernity and media on the individual. These authors observed how media technology alters the understanding of self in the world through its effect on such things as time and space, as well as its ability to change firmly held constructions about human existence.
Systems theorists argue that all parts of a system are interrelated; that is, the parts interdependently and interactively influence each other. In communication research, systems are often referred to as contexts and are nested within other systems. That is, “All communication takes place within a matrix of systems: the relationship between communicators, the physical setting, the society” (Walther, 1996, p. 13). Society and culture are two systems that influence the communication process, especially the interpretation of messages. Conversely, communication supports the formation of culture and cultural belief systems.
In addition to the diverse effects of a technologically mediated society, attempts at defining communication must examine the shared worlds of the participants who are involved in the communication. Walther (1996) described this dual communication perspective—shared worlds and formation of culture—in terms of society shaping the rules of behavior. Most social behavior is first learned within the context of the family unit; once the family behavior is understood, the individual moves out into other social groups. The ability to conceptualize the self with others in social settings is key to identity formation and effective interpersonal communication (p. 27).
Meyrowitz (1985, p. 131) employed the theories of George Herbert Mead (1932, 1934) to gain a better overall understanding of how other people think and evaluate their own actions. Mead (1934) suggested that individuals perceive their own behavior when they can envision themselves as social objects in relationship to others. According to Meyrowitz, television is a medium that enables viewers to experience an interpersonal relationship with television actors. However, the friendship that forms between the actor and the audience member is limited, because television actors do not provide interactive feedback. In contrast to this, interpersonal relationships that develop in face-to-face contexts are subject to change, as communicators adjust their messages based on feedback from the other person. Although television creates the feeling of interpersonal communication, the medium places limitations on the quality of the interpersonal relationships that develop. At the level of understanding the individual in relationship to others, Mead’s ideas provide a tertiary theoretical foundation for this study.
Mead (1934) theorized that the development of self is constructed through the realization of interactions with others. Filmer et al. (1998) described this realization as follows: “Within the individual, self-formation is generated in terms of a dialogue between two parts, the ‘I’ and the ‘me’” (p. 29). The “I” is made up of sociological and psychic stimuli that produce gestural behavior. In contrast, the “me” is the “response of the other which is internalized by the individual” (p. 29). As an individual becomes self-aware, he or she is simultaneously becoming aware of others. Conscious awareness of self and of others leads to identity formation.
Time is a communication medium characteristic central to the media ecology studies conducted by Lance Strate (2003). Human relationships build over time, and different media support the exchange of messages in either synchronous or asynchronous time. In interpersonal communication, exchanges of synchronous messages are often quite spontaneous. In contrast, exchanges of asynchronous written messages tend to be more reflective. For example, “a handwritten or typed letter can facilitate a personal relationship over distance, but the time it takes to transport the message along with the lack of immediate feedback alters the quality and quantity of information shared” (Cathcart & Gumpert, 1986, p. 30). The interactionism communication model suggests that through communication over time, communicators share a symbolic world that enlarges over time (Barnes, 2002).
Michel Foucault (1979) also described attempts to model a symbolic world that enlarges over time. In his examination of total institutions such as prisons and asylums, Foucault discussed a concept called panoptic power, or the power to see all. He adapted this idea from Jeremy Bentham’s 18th-century panopticon concept. Bentham argued that control and submission to authority could be maintained if inmates believed that their behavior could be observed at any time without their knowledge or consent. For the inmates, the power of authority is known but unverifiable, therefore shaping their behavior to that desired by those in control. Foucault carried this concept into the 20th century and described its impact on individuals. Acccording to Foucault, panoptic power has the ability to induce in the inmate a state of conscious and permanent visibility that assures the automatic functioning of power. So to arrange things that the surveillance is permanent in its effects, even if it is discontinuous in its action; that the perfection of power should tend to render its actual exercise unnecessary. (p. 201)
Therefore, “the inmate must never know whether he is being looked at at any one moment: but he must be sure that he may always be so” (p. 201). In this way, “he is seen, but he does not see: he is the object of information, never a subject of communication” (p. 200).
Media theorist Neil Postman (1985) demonstrated how media create symbolic environments that influence the way in which information is interpreted. For example, television creates an environment that presents information primarily in the form of entertainment. As a result, it is difficult to present serious issues through television programming. Moreover, the emphasis of visual symbols in television is more likely to evoke an emotional response in viewers. People first respond to visual imagery on an emotional, unconscious level before rational interpretation takes place. Additionally, because of the direct relationship between an image and the object it represents, visual representations of objects and people are likely to evoke feelings. In contrast, because language is abstracted from the object, the printed word requires a different type of cognitive understanding. The relation of words (including print) to objects, places, and things involves logic and reflection. Furthermore, people must know the language before they can understand what the words represent.
According to Lasch (1984), individuals attempt to defend themselves against feelings of victimization and powerlessness that are common in modern society. Lasch argued that society has begun to engender a behavior—which he called narcissistic survivalism—that was formerly observed only in extreme situations. Behaviors such as selective apathy, emotional disengagement from others, and a renunciation of past and future (living one day at a time) are all attempts to protect a core “minimal self” in dire straits. Attempts at narcissistic survivalism “have come to shape the lives of ordinary people under the ordinary conditions of a bureaucratic society widely perceived as a far-flung system of total control” (p. 58).
Lasch (1984) described the defense mechanisms that the individual employs to accomplish this narcissistic survivalism in response to the invasiveness of living in a modern, technological society: “Under siege, the self contracts to a defensive core, armed against adversity. Emotional equilibrium demands a minimal self, not the imperial self of yesteryear” (p. 15). Generally, this contraction of self is manifested through adapting and conforming behaviors, and through demonstrating compliance to the demands of the outside world in an attempt to protect the core minimal self. This adaptation blurs the frontiers of self and the outside world and creates more feelings of vulnerability, which are due to fear of exposure and discovery of self by those in authority.
According to Theall’s (2001) interpretation of McLuhan, dichotomous intellectual discourses deeply rooted in the visual mode of thinking are the result of the Gutenberg printing press revolution. This visual mode of thinking leaves little room for participation or for alternative discourses. Further, according to Sui and Goodchild (2001), McLuhan described a fundamental shift from the valuing of linear thinking (literacy) to the valuing of multisensory acoustic thinking. Literate thinking places information structurally and sequentially, with fixed boundaries. Acoustic thinking regards information as interconnected simultaneously, without boundaries. Visual thinking is thus centered and bounded, whereas acoustic thinking is built on a holistic and organic ontology. Acoustic space has not one fixed cardinal center, but many centers that are all floating in a cosmic system that honors only diversity. This shift demands that we engage in simultaneous understanding and integral awareness (Sui & Goodchild, 2001). The shift from a predominantly visual metaphor to an aural one was one of the major changes in the late 20th century and was made possible by an array of philosophical, technological, and social changes. At the fundamental level, visual and aural thinking (eye versus ear) uphold a different set of social values. We now know that sound imposes its concreteness on us by immersing us and surrounding us in its field. Furthermore, sound has a tendency to socialize, although voice is inherently relational and subjective. In contrast, sight entails an object world fixed in space, giving an illusion of permanence; vision is thus inherently detached and objective (Theall, 2001).
McLuhan’s tetrad enables us to reposition ourselves into a mode of thinking that is dynamic and holistic and to move away from the monolithic, linear, visual mode of thinking and being. Rather than simplistic utopian and dystopian views, McLuhan’s inclusive and irreducible four-part law of media provides a conceptual framework within which to understand the relationship between community development and various unexplored dimensions of community development which effect the delicate variations of physical and economic decline, social isolation, and political disempowerment. An exploratory probe resting on a set of questions instead of a bounded theory, the tetrad facilitates a simultaneous understanding and integral awareness (Sui & Goodchild, 2001).
Discussion
What Does Community Development Enhance?
Community development practitioners generally agree that community development has greatly facilitated a variety of exciting new tools for analyzing and visualizing social change (Chevalier & Buckles, 2008). From a broader perspective, community development must be understood as a part of the information revolution that has transformed our society from an industrial society into a postindustrial one (Strate, 2003).
Correspondingly, participatory research methodologies have been enhanced by community development, as is indicated by the capacity of these methodologies to effectively incorporate community action into the research plans of many traditionally trained researchers. It was not until this incorporation of community action that communities started to fully appreciate the benefits of participatory research, which had initially seemed too abstract for many (Gustavsen, 1996).
What Does Community Development Make Obsolete?
McLuhan’s law of media proposes that new media and technology do not simply extend our various mental and physical faculties. On the contrary, these media simultaneously render obsolete various social practices and human faculties. By “obsolescence,” McLuhan does not mean that certain media or social practices totally disappear or become outdated, but rather that they are no longer dominant. Community development does not simply extend our consensus capabilities without compliance to oligarchical power; it simultaneously renders obsolete many aspects of qualitative information-gathering practices such as focus groups and surveys. In other words, community development is influencing certain aspects of democracy as we know it (Krippendorff, 1995). Likewise, for an increasing number of social researchers, community development has rendered obsolete and has even partially eliminated the validity of collecting second-hand data, as so much primary data is increasingly available and accessible via social engagement. The reliance on primary data for information gathering and social applications has profound legal, ethical, and methodological implications (Chevalier & Buckles, 2008). During the past decade we have witnessed an increase in participatory research being conducted at the community level. This has not taken place in laboratories, office rooms, or journals, but rather in the field. Public service agencies are now relying on the creation of public policy based agencies such as the Saskatoon Health Region. That is, organizations that historically have relied heavily on quantitative medical data are now placing a greater emphasis on the collection and management of qualitative community-based data as one of their primary functions (Lemstra & Neudorf, 2008).
What Does Community Development Retrieve?
The third element of McLuhan’s framework is that new media retrieve certain practices and cultural elements long regarded as obsolete. One of the grand themes of his thesis, and perhaps the most controversial, is that electronic media are breaking from the dominant linear thinking patterns of the printed word, which itself made obsolete the oral tradition as the dominant mode of communication in many facets of society. In sharp contrast to the printing press, which is a predominately visual medium, electronic media are aural, tactile, and geared toward the ear or other senses. That is, electronic media are retrieving many traits of the oral culture—a phenomenon that Ong (1982) referred to as “the second orality.”
In the context of community development, the retrieval aspect has gone through several stages. The initial success of community development relied heavily on emancipatory constructs. Deficiencies in emancipatory capabilities motivated the community to retrieve many of the techniques developed during the quantitative revolution, as was evidenced by efforts during the late 1980s and early 1990s to link community development with spatial analysis and modeling tools. These efforts to improve the analytical capability of community development have led to the realization that our current conceptualization of community development is incomplete (Chevalier & Buckles, 2008). Thus, the second major retrieval within community development is the study and incorporation of electronic media, which is evidenced by the initiative of a grassroots social focus on marketing models and their potential role in the development of better social engagement tools for community development (Sui & Goodchild, 2001). A third major retrieval effort within community development is possibly the endeavor by social researchers—as well as critical social theorists—to link community development to various aspects of social theories in order to track and monitor best practices (Chevalier & Buckles, 2008).
Perhaps even more significant is the notion that community development has retrieved the role of speech and narrative. Community development as a medium does not simply lay the foundation for a bountiful community garden, an increase in social assistance benefits, or access to social housing. Behind these is usually a story to be read or a speech to be heard.
What Does Community Development Reverse Into?
The last proposition of McLuhan’s law of media is that when a medium is pushed to its limit it will be reversed to the opposite of what it was originally designed for: “We become what we behold; we first make the tools, then the tools will make us” (McLuhan, 1964, p. 23). McLuhan attempted to show that in the beginning media were an extension of people, but in time people become an extension of media. When a medium is pushed to its limit it becomes the message itself. Critical scholars of technology give this process a variety of different names, including technopoly (Postman, 1992). When we surrender our goals and social practices to the technical requirements of a machine, the technology itself becomes an “iron cage” (Lee, 2003) that restricts our imagination and creativity.
When community development is reversed into its opposite, it ceases to promote democratic practices in society. Instead, community development becomes driven by corporate greed or the state’s insatiable desire to survey and to collect intrusive information from ordinary citizens (Nissenbaum, 1999). Consequently, we become slaves of our media instead of using media to serve our higher goals and aspirations. Hypothetically, community development, when coupled with other information and communication technologies, could become a super panopticon to monitor and survey rather than to help ordinary citizens, especially the truly disadvantaged (Sui & Goodchild, 2001).
Conclusion
The central theme of McLuhan’s law of media is that the effect of media (or technology in general) on society is inherently paradoxical. Such paradoxical effects defy simplistically good or bad characterizations, therefore, it is necessary to understand the four aspects of the tetrad simultaneously. McLuhan’s implicit message is that the social impact of media is ambivalent, that excessive use always leads to the opposite of its original intent. In the context of community development, it is futile to debate whether community development is good or bad for society. The only meaningful question is how to reveal and deal with the ambivalent nature of the application of community development in society.
The redefinition of community development as new media constitutes a fundamental paradigm shift in current community development practices. It has been presented herein that most current community development applications have been treated as value-free and neutral in order to generate objective social consensus. This paper uncovers the argument that such a conceptualization of community development has unduly restricted the questions that can be asked and has created a false sense of objectivity. McLuhan’s work by extension provides a powerful framework for understanding the social, and sometimes unintended, consequences of community development. Re-emphasizing the nature of community development as a communications medium enables a better understanding of its somewhat elusive nature. Furthermore, an appreciation of community development as media provides a better understanding of how individuals and organizations might be able to systematically manipulate communication to conceal possible problems and solutions, engineer consent and trust, and misrepresenting facts and expectations. Community development practices, like all other media and communication tools, can be abused by individuals and organizations to manipulate results to legitimize and impose political, economic, and social agendas. This shift to a media rationality enables a more critical examination of how space, people, and environment have been represented, manipulated, and visualized within community development. Such a critical examination can promote a more democratic community development practice.
It may seem absurd to question the intent of community development that promotes the genuine caring for others as well as the world we live in. However, despite widespread community development, social inequity stubbornly persists. As Wittgenstein (1922) tried strenuously to prove, we cannot express everything about language using language itself, and we cannot solve social problems using technologies and media alone. Furthermore, this paper offers an that upholds the importance of a questioning that shakes people out of their reality. With the rapid advance of electronic media, humanity has run deeper and deeper into technological and media paradoxes which impact community development. McLuhan’s tetrad indicates the tools and technologies used as media to promote democratic development will inevitably make it impossible to provide solutions to social problems. To transcend this media paradox, a continuous process of defining and redefining our social goals is necessary, in order to not allow any media to dictate what society does and why.
References
Barnes, S. B. (2002, June). Media ecology and symbolic interactionism. Paper presented at the annual convention of the Media Ecology Association, New York.
Biro, G. M. (2000). Marshall McLuhan meets the millennium bug. New York: Uplevel.
Brügger, N. (2003). Theories of media and communication: Histories and relevance. Retrieved June 3, 2010, from http://www.medieteori.dk/publikationer/001_bruegger.pdf
Cathcart, R., & Gumpert, G. (1986). The person-computer interaction: A unique source. In G. Gumpert & R. Cathcart (Eds.), Intermedia: Interpersonal communication in a media world (pp. 323–332). New York: Oxford University Press.
Chevalier, J., & Buckles, D. (2008). SAS²: A guide to collaborative inquiry and social engagement. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; Ottawa, ON: International Development Research Centre.
Ellul, J. (1965). Propaganda: The formation of men’s attitudes. New York: Random House.
Feagin, J., Orum, A., & Sjoberg, G. (Eds.). (1991). A case for case study. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.
Filmer, P., Jenks, C., Searle, C., & Walsh, D. (1998). Developments in social theory. In C. Searle (Ed.), Researching society and culture (pp. 23–36). London: Sage.
Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York: Vintage Books.
Garcia, I., Giuliani, F., & Wiesenfeld, E. (1999). Community and sense of community: The case of an urban barrio in Caracas. Journal of Community Psychology, 27, 727–740.
Gustavsen, B. (1996). Action research, democratic dialogue, and the issue of ‘critical mass’ in change. Qualitative Inquiry, 2, 90–103.
Krippendorff, K. (1995). Undoing power. Critical Studies in Mass Communication, 12, 101–132.
Lasch, C. (1984). The culture of narcissism: American life in an age of diminishing expectations. New York: Norton.
Lee, J. Y. (2003). Charting the codes of cyberspace: A rhetoric of electronic mail. In L. Strate, R. Jacobson, & S. Gibson (Eds.), Communication and cyberspace (2nd ed., pp. 307–328). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Lemstra, M., & Neudorf, C. (2008). Health disparity in Saskatoon: Analysis to intervention. Retrieved June 1, 2010, from http://www.saskatoonhealthregion.ca/your_health/
documents/PHO/HealthDisparityRept-complete.pdf
McLuhan, M. (1951). The mechanical bride: Folklore of industrial man. New York: Vanguard Press.
McLuhan, M. (1962). The Gutenberg galaxy: The making of typographic man. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
McLuhan, M. (1964). Understanding media: The extension of man. London: Sphere Books.
McLuhan, M., & McLuhan, E. (1988). Laws of media: The new science. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
Mead, G. H. (1932). The philosophy of the present (A. E. Murphy, Ed). Chicago: Open Court.
Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society (C. W. Morris, Ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Meyrowitz, J. (1985). No sense of place. New York: Oxford University Press.
Mumford, L. (1934). Technics and civilization. New York: Harcourt, Brace.
Nissenbaum, H. (1999). The meaning of anonymity in an information age. The Information Society, 15(2), 141–144.
Ong, W. J. (1982). Orality and literacy: The technologizing of the word. London: Methuen.
Postman, N. (1985). Amusing ourselves to death: Public discourse in the age of show business. New York: Penguin.
Postman, N. (1992). Technopoly: The surrender of culture to technology. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
Strate, L. (2003). Cybertime. In L. Strate, R. Jacobson, & S. B. Gibson (Eds.), Communication and cyberspace (2nd ed., pp. 379–382). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
Sui, D. Z., & Goodchild, M. F. (2001). Are GIS becoming new media? International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 15, 387–390.
Theall, D. (2001). The virtual Marshall McLuhan. Montreal, QC: McGill University Press.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3–43.
Wittgenstein, L. (1922). Tractatus logico-philosophicus (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
Yin, R. K. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
***
