From what I was reading in this article it was confusing to me, but the gist of the topic is what I can interpret from this article is that technology has made messages much more accessible to the public and it shows the limit that can be broken through with technology. While it may sound like it can have a huge positive impact there are always downsides in technology where people will do it for other means. The medium of the message is what made the standardization 

 In around the second paragraph of the article “This fact, characteristic of all media, means that the “content” of any medium is always another medium”  The content of the medium is what the designer should think of using, the content is much more of the idea of what a designer has to complete the product. The way of invention had been described by McLuhan as a whole new innovation of lifestyle and with technology that people have constantly used. I feel like in the same way designers today wouldn’t have innovated their idea without the help of technology and the access of information they can get to use. 

 Overall , I still only understand the topic at hand, but the whole article seems to not make it much more clear for people who are not used to that form of writing and trying to decipher the information.