Mediated Time pp 149-171 | Cite as

Media Futurism: Time Warps of Future Media Homes in Speculative Films and Corporate Videos

  • Deborah ChambersEmail author


This chapter examines past and present corporate speculative films and videos of “homes of the future” to address a particular kind of mediated time: media futures. Guided by the concept of media imaginaries and taking a material-discursive approach, it analyses enactments of discursive fantasies within these visual narratives. The chapter explains that tech companies perform as “future-makers” to frame utopian visions of smart home futures. It proposes that these corporate narratives form discourses of media futurism. These imaginings entail time warps that discursively reorder time, space and events to advocate technology-driven visionary futures. Smart home futures foretell personal agency framed by a technologized time to come characterised by speed, immediacy and work connectivity. These corporate visions of media futures may influence present-day aspirations and sway future policies.


  1. Adam, B. (2011). Wendell Bell and the sociology of the future: Challenges past, present and future. Futures, 43, 590–595.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adam, B., & Groves, C. (2007). Future matters: Action, knowledge, ethics. Amsterdam: Brill Books.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Aldrich, F. K. (2003). Smart homes: Past, present and future. In R. Harper (Ed.), Inside the smart home (pp. 17–40). London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Attebery, B. (2002). Decoding gender in science fiction. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Baar, A. (2011). Corning Glass video goes through the roof. Marketing Daily. Accessed 19 June 2018.
  6. Barad, K. (2003). Posthumanist performativity: Towards an understanding of how matter comes to matter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Baudrillard, J. (1980). The implosion of meaning in the media and the implosion of the social in the masses. In K. Woodward (Ed.), The myths of information. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
  8. Baudrillard, J. (1983). Simulations. New York: Semiotexte.Google Scholar
  9. Berkhout, F. (2006). Normative expectations in systems innovation. Technology Analysis and Strategic Management, 18, 299–311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bijker, W. (2009). How is technology made? That is the question! Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34(1), 63–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Bina, O., Mateus, S., Pereira, L., & Caffa, A. (2016). The future imagined: Exploring fiction as a means of reflecting on today’s grand societal challenges and tomorrow’s options. Futures, 86, 166–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Borup, M., Brown, N., Konrad, K., & Van Lente, H. (2006). The sociology of expectations in science and technology. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 18, 285–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Brown, N. (2005). Shifting tenses: Reconnecting regimes of truth and hope. Configurations, 13, 331–355.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chambers, D. (2016). Changing media, homes and households. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Clough, P. T., Gregory, K., Haber, B., & Scannel, R. J. (2015). The datalogical turn. In P. Vannini (Ed.), Non-representational methodologies (pp. 146–164). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Coleman, R., & Tutton, R. (2017). Introduction to special issue of sociological review on futures in question: Theories, methods, practices. The Sociological Review, 65(3), 440–447.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dourish, P., & Bell, G. (2014). Resistance is futile: Reading science fiction alongside ubiquitous computing. Personal Ubiquitous Computing, 18(4), 769–778.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Du Gay, P., Hall, S., Jane, L., Mackay, H., & Negus, K. (1997). Doing cultural studies: The story of the Sony Walkman. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  20. Featherstone, M. (2007). Consumer culture and postmodernism. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  21. Forsythe, D. (2001). Studying those who study us: An anthropologist in the world of artificial intelligence. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Galloway, A. (2013). Emergent media technologies, speculation, expectation, and human/nonhuman relations. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 57(1), 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Grossberg, L. (2010). Cultural studies in the future tense. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gunnarsson-Östling, U. (2011). ‘Gender in futures: A study of gender and feminist papers published in futures’, 1969–2009. Futures, 43(9), 1029–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Haran, J., McNeil, M., Kitzinger, J., & O’Riordan, K. (2007). Human cloning in the media: From science fiction to science practice. London: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Harding, S. (2010). Feminism, science and the anti-enlightenment critiques. In A. Garry & M. Pearsall (Eds.), Women, knowledge and reality: Explorations in feminist philosophy (pp. 298–320). Boston: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
  28. Harmon, E., & Mazmanian, M. (2013). Stories of the smartphone in everyday discourse: Conflict, tension & instability. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI ‘13). New York: Association for Computing Machinery.Google Scholar
  29. Hirshberg, A., & Schoen, R. (1974). Barriers to the widespread utilisation of residential solar energy: The prospects for solar energy in the U.S. housing industry. Policy Sciences, 5, 453–468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Horrigan, B. (1986). The home of tomorrow 1927–1945. In J. J. Corn (Ed.), Imagining tomorrow: History, technology and the American future (pp. 137–163). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  31. Hurley, K. (2008). Is that a future we want? An ecofeminist exploration of images of the future in contemporary film. Futures, 40(4), 346–359.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Jameson, F. (1982). Progress versus utopia; or, can we imagine the future? Science Fiction Studies, 9(2), 147–158.Google Scholar
  33. Jasanoff, S., & Kim, S.-H. (2009). Containing the atom: Sociotechnical imaginaries and nuclear power in the United States and South Korea. Minerva, 47(2), 119–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Keenan, M., Cutler, P., Marks, J., Meylan, R., Smith, C., & Koivisto, E. (2012). Orienting international science cooperation to meet global ‘grand challenges’. Science and Public Policy, 39, 166–177.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kemper, S., & Zylinska, J. (2012). Life after new media: Mediation as a vital process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Kirby, D. (2010). The future is now: Diegetic prototypes and the role of popular films in generating real-world technological development. Social Studies of Science, 40(1), 41–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Liao, T. (2018). Mobile versus headworn augmented reality: How visions of the future shape, contest, and stabilize an emerging technology. New Media & Society, 20(2), 796–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Marvin, C. (1988). When old technologies were new: Thinking about electrical communication in the late nineteenth century. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Mellor, F. (2007). Colliding worlds: Asteroid research and the legitimization of war in space. Social Studies of Science, 37(4), 499–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mendick, H., & Francis, B. (2012). Boffin and geek identities: Abject or privileged? Gender and Education, 24, 15–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Milburn, C. (2002). Nanotechnology in the age of posthuman engineering: Science fiction as science. Configurations, 10, 261–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Morley, D. (2007). Media, modernity, and technology: The geography of the new. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  43. Natale, S., & Balbi, G. (2014). Media and the imaginary in history. Media History, 20(2), 203–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nixon, S. (2017). Life in the kitchen: Television advertising, the housewife and domestic modernity in Britain, 1955–1969. Contemporary British History, 31(1), 69–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Opitz, D. L., Bergwik, S., & Van Tiggelen, B. (Eds.). (2016). Domesticity in the making of modern science. London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  46. Pechtelidis, Y., Kosma, Y., & Chronaki, A. (2015). Between a rock and a hard place: Women and computer technology. Gender and Education, 27(2), 164–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Peers, S. (2018). Statistics on women in engineering. Women’s Engineering Society. Accessed 20 June 2018.
  48. Pinch, T., & Bijker, W. (1987). The social construction of facts and artifacts. In W. Hughes & T. Pinch (Eds.), The social construction of technological systems (pp. 17–50). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  49. Pluretti, R., Lingel, J., & Sinnreich, A. (2016). Toward an “other” dimension: An essay on transcendence of gender and sexuality. International Journal of Communication, 10, 5732–5739.Google Scholar
  50. Reeves, S. (2012). Envisioning ubiquitous computing. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Austin, TX, pp. 1573–1582.Google Scholar
  51. Spigel, L. (1992). Make room for TV: Television and the family ideal in postwar America. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Spigel, L. (2001a). Media homes, then and now. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 4(4), 385–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Spigel, L. (2001b). Welcome to the dreamhouse: Popular media and postwar suburbia. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Spigel, L. (2005). Designing the smart house: Posthuman domesticity and conspicuous production. European Journal of Cultural Studies, 8(4), 403–426.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Spigel, L. (2010). Designing the smart house: Posthuman domesticity and conspicuous production. In C. Berry, S. Kim, & L. Spigel (Eds.), Electronic elsewheres: Media technology and the experience of social space (pp. 55–95). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  56. Taylor, C. (2003). Modern social imaginaries. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Tomlinson, J. (2007). The culture of speed. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  58. Tutton, R. (2017). Wicked futures: Meaning, matter and the sociology of the future. The Sociological Review, 65(3), 478–492.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Urry, J. (2011). Climate change and society. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  60. Urry, J. (2013). Societies beyond oil: Oil dregs and social futures. London: Zed Books.Google Scholar
  61. Urry, J. (2016). What is the future? Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  62. Wajcman, J. (2004). Technofeminism. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  63. Webster, J. (2013). Shaping women’s work: Gender, employment and information technology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  64. Young, G. R. (2003). Mergers and acquisitions: Planning and action. London: Routledge (first published 1965, reprinted 2003).Google Scholar


  1. CBS (Producer) Walter Cronkite (Director). (1967). At home 2001, homes of the future, series: The 21st century [documentary]. Available at Accessed 24 Mar 2018.
  2. Monsanto Chemical Company (Producer). (1957). The Monsanto house of the future [documentary film]. United States: Disneyland, Bay State Film Productions, Inc. Available at Accessed 28 May 2018.
  3. Philco-Ford Corporation (Producer), Tom Thomas organisation (Director). (1967). The home of the future: Year 1999 A.D. Available at Accessed 24 Mar 2018.
  4. Rough House/Corning (Producers) Dave Mackie (Director). (2010). A day made of glass. Available at Accessed 7 Apr 2019.
  5. Walt Disney Company (Producer), Conant, R. (Director). (2016). 60 years of imaginearing: Monsanto’s house of the future [documentary: Disneyland Diamond Celebration]. United States: Walt Disney. Accessed 7 Apr 2019.

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Arts and CulturesNewcastle UniversityNewcastleUK

Personalised recommendations