One leading technology blog has fun with [device]-killer rhetoric. That's when something is described as, say, an iPhone killer, an email killer, etc.
TechCrunch pushes the metaphor to a wall built from American Psycho (2000):
The article does a decent job of tearing up such rhetoric. "[thing]-killer" rarely describes reality, either in terms of market analysis, product capabilities (the device in question has yet to appear!) . Calling something a "[thing]-killer" is better marketing, too:
it’s a hell of a lot sexier than saying something is a “XXXXX competitor.” That’s boring (and longer, to boot).
We could also add to the critique the way that technology often works by devices complementing each other, or even overlapping a bit, a la imbrication.
But the appeal of murderous market rhetoric is joyously Infocultish. It's a fine case of using horror rhetoric to talk about technologies, mobilizing anxieties and excitement.
Perhaps "[thing]-killer" rhetoric will eventually deepen, get more Gothic. Then the next company will create a "[thing]-killer" in, say, an underground lab, or lair. "[thing]-killer"s will be built from dead bodies, laced together with steampunk devices. It will surface in the rooms of children, both teenagers and toddlers. It will be used by al-Qaeda, copyright violators, pornographers, and gamers. "[thing]-killer" will threaten everything we are told to hold dear, and fill us all with trembling desire. Then it will be... ordinary.
Yes, I'm referring to the movie, rather than the novel (1991). Because
a) that's what the story was using, and
b) the movie is much better than the book.
Comments