>>115340
from https://cla.purdue.edu/academic/english/theory/postmodernism/modules/baudrillardsimulation.html:

1) in the first order of simulacra, which he associates with the pre-modern period, the image is a clear counterfeit of the real; the image is recognized as just an illusion, a place marker for the real; 2) in the second order of simulacra, which Baudrillard associates with the industrial revolution of the nineteenth century, the distinctions between the image and the representation begin to break down because of mass production and the proliferation of copies. Such production misrepresents and masks an underlying reality by imitating it so well, thus threatening to replace it (e.g. in photography or ideology); however, there is still a belief that, through critique or effective political action, one can still access the hidden fact of the real; 3) in the third order of simulacra, which is associated with the postmodern age, we are confronted with a precession of simulacra; that is, the representation precedes and determines the real. There is no longer any distinction between reality and its representation; there is only the simulacrum.

Although it is true that technological differences throughout history can produce representations with distinct semiotic structures, it has never followed such a determined pattern. How a technology effects what kind of representations are proliferated is contingent on historically specific context, and on what kind of thing is being represented. We still don't have smell-o-vision for example. The “third order simulacrum” is meant to be a representation that comes before and functions to determine what it represents. Bauldrillard's own examples of simulacrum don't even really fit that pattern because he's retarded. All he ever did was butcher and sensationalise the much better work of the Situationists and Semioticians.