From what I did comprehend from the passage the author is arguing that the medium of the message is indicative of our society rather than the content of the message itself. This is because the mediums which we employ are a result of what society wants. I agree with this sentiment to an extent in that the content of the message remains somewhat consistent as humanity progresses. People will always want pleasure and the mediums we develop are a direct product of our desires. For example, in The Machine Stops one could argue that the people are like us, they desire efficiency and control. However, because they communicate or acquire their food via different mediums we consider them to be much different, even though what they talk about or what they order is similar to what we would. When I think about our discussion about how film captures people with darker skin in a less optimal way I can see why the medium is the message. The message with film is that people with darker skin didn’t matter as much to society. If they did, then perhaps film wouldn’t have been such a success as they would be missing out on a bigger market, but because people with lighter skin were the majority of film’s consumers it was fine.