In my understanding, McLuhan’s view is that the medium has more value than the message at a certain time since it is medium that changes the way that people work, live and think. Is it appropriate to say that “the medium is the message” simply because the medium is more valuable or has more long-lasting meanings? What does “message” stand for? Is message equals to value? Also, message depends on the medium just like thoughts depend on a thinker. But can we say that “the thinker is the thought”? After all, what really matters is thought itself even if it may be proved wrong and be replaced by newer thoughts. What’s the value of a thinker without thoughts? Is a thinker still a thinker without thoughts? Is a medium still a medium without messages? Does this mean that medium can never be separated from message? Can we say that “the medium is the message” because they cannot be separated? Well…I don’t think so. Medium cannot develop without those precious thoughts that contain in the messages. It is never the medium that is pushing the development of human society. It is those ideas in the messages that are pushing us forward.